DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Brockman v. Brockman, 157 N.W. 1086.

36 citing documents.

  • State v. Gianakos 644 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 2002
  • State v. Gianakos 644 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 2002
    See, e.g., Hannuksela, d at 676 (acknowledging Minnesota’s important public policy of protecting the marital relationship); Warner v. Warner, 219 Minn. 59, 67 , (noting that preservation of the sanctity of marriage is essential to the public welfare (citing Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148, 151 , 157 N.W.
  • Corah v. Corah 75 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 1956
  • Corah v. Corah 75 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 1956
    Cantieny v. Boze, 209 Minn. 407 , , 173 A. L. R. 321; Wheeler v. Whitney, 156 Minn. 362 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .
  • Berg v. Berg 34 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1948
  • Berg v. Berg 34 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1948
    4 Young v. Young, 17 Minn. 153 (181); Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1.
  • Warner v. Warner 17 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 1944
  • Warner v. Warner 17 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 1944
    Because the preservation of the sanctity of the marriage relation is deemed essential to public welfare, the state, representing the public, “is interested in seeing that divorce is granted only on lawful grounds and in a lawful manner.” Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148, 151 , .
  • Tankar Gas, Inc. v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. 9 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 1943
  • Tankar Gas, Inc. v. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. 9 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 1943
    The facts here, therefore, bring it well within the rule of Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Murray v. Calkins, 191 Minn. 460 , ; United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U. S. 61 , 25 L. ed. 93, and the most recent ex *274 pression of.
  • Bloomquist v. Thomas 9 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1943
  • Bloomquist v. Thomas 9 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1943
    Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Murray v. Calkins, 191 Minn. 460 , ; McElrath v. McElrath, 120 Minn. 380 , , 44 L.R.A.(N.S.)
  • Cantieny v. Boze 296 N.W. 491 Minn. 1941
  • Cantieny v. Boze 296 N.W. 491 Minn. 1941
    Brandes v. Carpenter, 68 Minn. 388, 390 , ; Schmitt v. Hager, 88 Minn. 413, 415 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148, 152 , ; Mackall v. Casilear, 137 U. S. 556, 566 , 11 S. Ct. 178 , 34 L. ed. 776.
  • Sinell v. Town of Sharon 289 N.W. 44 Minn. 1939
  • Sinell v. Town of Sharon 289 N.W. 44 Minn. 1939
    Sweet v. Lowry, 131 Minn. 109 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .
  • Lamprey v. American Hoist & Derrick Co. 266 N.W. 434 Minn. 1936
  • Lamprey v. American Hoist & Derrick Co. 266 N.W. 434 Minn. 1936
    In Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148, 151 , , the court said: “If the case is brought within the statute, it is the duty of the court to grant relief; but the right to have a judgment vacated because of fraud of the prevailing party is not an absolute one.
  • Jefferson County Bank v. Erickson 247 N.W. 245 Minn. 1933
  • Jefferson County Bank v. Erickson 247 N.W. 245 Minn. 1933
    49; Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , ; Twitchell v. Glenwood-Inglewood Co. 131 Minn. 375 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Swaney v. Crawley, 154 Minn. 263 , ; Lydiard v. Coffee, 167 Minn. 389 , .
  • Hawley v. Knott 216 N.W. 800 Minn. 1927
  • Hawley v. Knott 216 N.W. 800 Minn. 1927
    505; National Council v. Ruder, 126 Minn. 151 , ; Kriha v. Kartak, 127 Minn. 406 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Marcus v. National Council, 131 Minn. 338 , ; Penniston v. Miller, 156 Minn. 103 , ; Saari v. Puustinen, 161 Minn. 367 , .
  • Boling v. Dickinson 210 N.W. 875 Minn. 1926
  • Boling v. Dickinson 210 N.W. 875 Minn. 1926
    Brandes v. Carpenter, 68 Minn. 388 , ; Hanson v. Swenson, 77 Minn. 70 , ; Dickman v. Dryden, 90 Minn. 244 , ; Sweet v. Lowry, 123 Minn. 13 , , 47 L. R. A. (N. S.) 451; Sweet v. Lowry, 131 Minn. 109 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; In re Estate of Barlow v. Barlow, 152 Minn. 249 , .
  • Betcher v. Midland National Bank 209 N.W. 325 Minn. 1926
  • Betcher v. Midland National Bank 209 N.W. 325 Minn. 1926
    Saari v. Puustinen, 161 Minn. 367 , 201 N. W. *486 434; Penniston v. Miller, 156 Minn. 403 , ; Marcus v. K. & L. of S. 134 Minn. 338 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Kriha v. Kartak, 127 Minn. 406 , ; Young v. Lindquist, 126 Minn. 414 , ; McElrath v. McElrath, 120 Minn. 380 , , 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 505.
  • Appeal of Anderson v. Barlow 188 N.W. 282 Minn. 1922
  • Appeal of Anderson v. Barlow 188 N.W. 282 Minn. 1922
    Brandes v. Carpenter, 68 Minn. 388 , ; Hanson v. Swenson, 77 Minn. 70 , ; Coleman v. Akers, 87 Minn. 492 , ; Dickman v. Dryden, 90 Minn. 244 , ; Sweet v. Lowry, 123 Minn. 13 , , 47 L. R. A. (N. *253 S.) 451; Sweet v. Lowry, 131 Minn. 109 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .
  • Walters v. Walters 186 N.W. 693 Minn. 1922
  • Walters v. Walters 186 N.W. 693 Minn. 1922
    True v. True, 6 Minn. 315 (458); Bomsta v. Johnson, 38 Minn. 230 , ; Kriha v. Kartak, 127 Minn. 406 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .
  • Ricker v. J. L. Owens Co. 182 N.W. 960 Minn. 1921
  • Ricker v. J. L. Owens Co. 182 N.W. 960 Minn. 1921
    The rule applicable is fully and clearly stated in the case of Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148, 152 , , where it was said: “The defense of laches does not, like the statute of limitations, depend entirely upon lapse of time.
  • Northern Trust Co. v. Consolidated Elevator Co. 171 N.W. 265 Minn. 1919
  • Northern Trust Co. v. Consolidated Elevator Co. 171 N.W. 265 Minn. 1919
    Twichell v. Glenwood-Inglewood Co. 131 Minn. 375 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .
  • Marcus v. National Council of Knights & Ladies of Security 159 N.W. 835 Minn. 1916
  • Marcus v. National Council of Knights & Ladies of Security 159 N.W. 835 Minn. 1916
    The most recent are National Council of K. & L. of S. v. Ruder, 126 Minn. 154 , ; Kriha v. Kartak, 127 Minn. 406 , , and Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , .