DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Haskell v. Haskell, 132 N.W. 1129.

31 citing documents.

  • Rubenstein v. Rubenstein 202 N.W.2d 662 Minn. 1972
  • Rubenstein v. Rubenstein 202 N.W.2d 662 Minn. 1972
    We believe the facts and rulings herein can be distinguished from the decisions in Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , and Barbaras v. Barbaras, 88 Minn. 105 , 92 N. W. *33 522 (1902), and the other cases cited by defendant.
  • Bissell v. Bissell 191 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 1971
  • Bissell v. Bissell 191 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 1971
    Senn v. Senn, 254 Minn. 294 , Warren v. Warren, 116 Minn. 458 , Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , Id.
  • Druck v. Druck 103 N.W.2d 123 Minn. 1960
  • Followed Druck v. Druck 103 N.W.2d 123 Minn. 1960
    The rule we follow is well stated in Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10, 13 , , where we said: “Under the statute of this state the court awarding a judgment for alimony, whether such alimony be payable in a gross amount or in instalments, has undoubted authority to revise or modify such judgment.
  • Wilcox v. Wilcox 24 N.W.2d 237 Minn. 1946
  • Wilcox v. Wilcox 24 N.W.2d 237 Minn. 1946
    *Page 285 In Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , 132 N.W.
  • Martens v. Martens 1 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1941
  • Martens v. Martens 1 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1941
    Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10, 13 , .
  • Clarizio v. Castigliano 277 N.W. 262 Minn. 1938
  • Clarizio v. Castigliano 277 N.W. 262 Minn. 1938
    Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , ; Warren v. Warren, 116 Minn. 458 , .
  • Holida v. Holida 237 N.W. 2 Minn. 1931
  • Holida v. Holida 237 N.W. 2 Minn. 1931
    (2 ed. & Supp.) §§ 410, 2805; Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , .
  • Lindbloom v. Lindbloom 230 N.W. 117 Minn. 1930
  • Lindbloom v. Lindbloom 230 N.W. 117 Minn. 1930
    An application of this sort “is addressed largely to the discretion of the trial court.” Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , ; Id.
  • Plankers v. Plankers 217 N.W. 488 Minn. 1928
  • Plankers v. Plankers 217 N.W. 488 Minn. 1928
    The rule governing the trial court in orders of the sort noAV under re\iew is Avell stated and restated in Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , , and Id.
  • Webber v. Webber 196 N.W. 646 Minn. 1923
  • Webber v. Webber 196 N.W. 646 Minn. 1923
  • Spratt v. Spratt 185 N.W. 509 Minn. 1921
  • Spratt v. Spratt 185 N.W. 509 Minn. 1921
    Holmes v. Holmes, 90 Minn. 466 , ; Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , .
  • Searles v. Searles 168 N.W. 133 Minn. 1918
    G. S. 1913, §§ 7128-7129; Haskell v. Has- *388 kell, 116 Minn, 10, , and cases cited; Warren v. Warren, 116 Minn. 458 , ; Hoff v. Hoff, 133 Minn. 86 , .
  • Roberts v. Roberts 161 N.W. 148 Minn. 1917
  • Roberts v. Roberts 161 N.W. 148 Minn. 1917
    Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , ; Warren v. Warren, 116 Minn. 458 , ; Hoff v. Hoff, 133 Minn. 86 , .
  • Hoff v. Hoff 157 N.W. 999 Minn. 1916
  • Hoff v. Hoff 157 N.W. 999 Minn. 1916
    Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , , and cases there cited.
  • Fitzpatrick v. Fitzpatrick 148 N.W. 1074 Minn. 1914
  • Fitzpatrick v. Fitzpatrick 148 N.W. 1074 Minn. 1914
    Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , ; Blake v. Blake, 68 Wis.
  • Haskell v. Haskell 138 N.W. 787 Minn. 1912
  • Haskell v. Haskell 138 N.W. 787 Minn. 1912
    See Haskell v. Haskell, 116 Minn. 10 , , where the provisions of the judgment concerning alimony are set out in full.