DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Webber v. Webber, 196 N.W. 646.

34 citing documents.

  • Russell Eldon Briles, Minn. 2018
    Webber v. Webber , (“[T]he 10 duty and prerogative of the court is to apply the law as it is.”).
  • Gilbertson v. Gilbertson 220 N.W.2d 512 Minn. 1974
  • Gilbertson v. Gilbertson 220 N.W.2d 512 Minn. 1974
    It is appropriate to repeat the admonition we set forth in Johnston v. Johnston, 280 Minn. 81, 86 , : “* * * While the court may consider the comparative fault of the parties as an element in fixing the amount of alimony and division of property (Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ), we caution that such awards are made not as a penalty but as a substitute for the husband’s duty to support his wife and should be resolved primarily upon evidence of her needs and his ability to pay.” However, the h
  • Johnston v. Johnston 158 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1968
  • Johnston v. Johnston 158 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1968
    While.the court may consider the comparative fault of the parties as an element in fixing the amount of alimony and division of property (Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ), we caution that such awards are made not as a penalty but as a substitute for the husband’s duty to support his wife and should be resolved primarily upon evidence of her needs and his ability to pay.
  • Kucera v. Kucera 146 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1966
  • Kucera v. Kucera 146 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1966
    In Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422, 427 , , this court said: “* * * We cannot interfere with this award, unless there has been an abuse of discretion which means a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by and clearly against reason and evidence; a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment — one that is clearly again
  • Johnson v. Johnson 84 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1957
  • Johnson v. Johnson 84 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1957
    2 Baker v. Baker, 224 Minn. 117 , 28 N. W. (2d) 164 ; Loth v. Loth, 227 Minn. 387 , 35 N. W. (2d) 542 , 6 A. L. R. (2d) 176; Krusemark v. Krusemark, 232 Minn. 416 , 46 N. W. (2d) 647 ; Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , .
  • Ramsey v. CHICAGO GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY CO. 77 N.W.2d 176 Minn. 1956
  • Baskerville v. Baskerville 75 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 1956
  • Baskerville v. Baskerville 75 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 1956
    19 Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ; Louden v. Louden, 221 Minn. 338 , 22 N. W. (2d) 164 .
  • Swanson v. Swanson 46 N.W.2d 878 Minn. 1951
  • Swanson v. Swanson 46 N.W.2d 878 Minn. 1951
    3 Clark v. Clark, 114 Minn. 22 , ; Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ; Potter v. Potter, 224 Minn. 29 , 27 N. W. (2d) 784 ; Loth v. Loth, 227 Minn. 387 , 35 N. W. (2d) 542 , 6 A. L. R. (2d) 176.
  • Krusemark v. Krusemark 46 N.W.2d 647 Minn. 1951
  • Krusemark v. Krusemark 46 N.W.2d 647 Minn. 1951
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ; Baker v. Baker, 224 Minn. 117 , 28 N. W. (2d) 164 ; Burke v. Burke, 208 Minn. 1 , .
  • Loth v. Loth 35 N.W.2d 542 Minn. 1949
  • Loth v. Loth 35 N.W.2d 542 Minn. 1949
    Potter v. Potter, 224 Minn. 29 , 27 N. W. (2d) *401 784; Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , .
  • Ellingson v. Ellingson 34 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1948
  • Ellingson v. Ellingson 34 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1948
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , ; Baker v. Baker, 224 Minn. 117 , 28 N. W. (2d) 164 .
  • Baker v. Baker 28 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1947
  • Baker v. Baker 28 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1947
    In Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422, 427 , , we said: “The trial court had means of estimating the true nature and degree of delinquency of the parties, the necessities of the respondent, with respect to which we are comparatively uninformed.
  • Potter v. Potter 27 N.W.2d 784 Minn. 1947
  • Potter v. Potter 27 N.W.2d 784 Minn. 1947
    In Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , , the wife’s claim for divorce was rejected by the trial court, but as to the wife’s right to alimony, against the husband’s strenuous objection to the granting of such relief, especially where the wife had brought the husband no property and had not by her industry and- thrift aided him in the accumul
  • Louden v. Louden 22 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1946
  • Louden v. Louden 22 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1946
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , , and cases therein *342 cited; Gerard v. Gerard, 216 Minn. 543 , 13 N. W. (2d) 606 .
  • Gerard v. Gerard 13 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1944
  • Gerard v. Gerard 13 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1944
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422, 424 , , defines and applies the statutory rule, and many cases are there cited to sustain and amplify its purpose.
  • Bensel v. Hall 225 N.W. 104 Minn. 1929
  • Bensel v. Hall 225 N.W. 104 Minn. 1929
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , .
  • Cairns v. Lewis 210 N.W. 885 Minn. 1926
  • Cairns v. Lewis 210 N.W. 885 Minn. 1926
    G. S. 1913, § 7128, now G. S. 1923, § 8602; Web-ber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , .
  • Burton v. Burton 199 N.W. 908 Minn. 1924
  • Burton v. Burton 199 N.W. 908 Minn. 1924
    Webber v. Webber, 157 Minn. 422 , .