DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 96 N.W.2d 14.

37 citing documents.

  • In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
  • Marriage of Oldewurtel v. Redding 421 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1988
  • Marriage of Oldewurtel v. Redding 421 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1988
    See Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80
  • Markert v. Behm 394 N.W.2d 239 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Markert v. Behm 394 N.W.2d 239 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    See Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80, 90
  • Marriage of Otis v. Otis 299 N.W.2d 114 Minn. 1980
  • Ruzic v. Ruzic 281 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1979
  • Ruzic v. Ruzic 281 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1979
    We summarized them in Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80, 90 , : “In exercising sound discretion the court may consider the ages of the parties and the earning ability of each; the conduct of their marriage and its duration; the station they occupy in life; the circumstances and necessities of each; the probability of continuing present employment int
  • Bogen v. Bogen 261 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1977
  • Bogen v. Bogen 261 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1977
    6 Additionally, in Ruprecht *610 v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80, 90 , we enumerated the factors which a trial court may properly consider in dividing marital property: “ * * * In exercising sound discretion the court may consider the ages of the parties and the earning ability of each; the conduct of their marriage and its duration; the station they occupy
  • McGough v. McGough 249 N.W.2d 885 Minn. 1977
  • McGough v. McGough 249 N.W.2d 885 Minn. 1977
    Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , Eck v. Eck, 252 Minn. 290
  • Peterson v. Peterson 242 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 1976
  • Peterson v. Peterson 242 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 1976
    In Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80, 90 , we enumerated possible factors to be considered prior to property distribution: “* * * In exercising sound discretion the court may consider the ages of the parties and the earning ability of each; the conduct of their marriage and its duration; the station they occupy in life; the cir
  • Hertz v. Hertz 229 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1975
  • Hertz v. Hertz 229 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1975
    Albertson v. Albertson, 243 Minn. 212 , Kucera v. Kucera, 275 Minn. 252 , Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80
  • Cooper v. Cooper 214 N.W.2d 682 Minn. 1974
  • Cooper v. Cooper 214 N.W.2d 682 Minn. 1974
    Ru-precht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .” An award of alimony is granted not as a matter of right, and the award rests in the sound discretion of the trial court.
  • Wilkens v. Wilkens 185 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1971
  • Wilkens v. Wilkens 185 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1971
    Kucera v. Kucera, 275 Minn. 252 , 146 N. W. (2d) 181 ; Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .
  • Messer v. Messer 184 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 1971
  • Messer v. Messer 184 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 1971
    Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .
  • Bollenbach v. Bollenbach 175 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 1970
  • Bollenbach v. Bollenbach 175 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 1970
    In Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80, 90 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14, 23 , we said: “* * * In the disposition of property acquired during coverture the court may upon statutory authority make such disposition as shall appear just and equitable, having regard to the nature and determination of the issues in the case.
  • Rodieck v. Rodieck 450 P.2d 725 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
  • Christenson v. Christenson 162 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1968
  • Christenson v. Christenson 162 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1968
    Franklin v. Franklin, supra; Kasal v. Kasal, 227 Minn. 529 , 35 N. W. (2d) 745 ; Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .
  • Cozik v. Cozik 155 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1968
  • Cozik v. Cozik 155 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1968
    ding one-half of the husband’s future earnings and income, as it deems just and reasonable, having regard for the circumstances as described in section 518.59, and may make the payment thereof a lien or charge upon any real or personal property of the husband.” 4 Krusemark v. Krusemark, 232 Minn. 416 , 46 N. W. (2d) 647 ; Holmes v. Holmes, 255 Minn. 270 , 96 N. W. (2d) 547 ; Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 ; Posselt v. Posselt, 271 Minn. 575 , 136 N. W. (2d) 659 ; Cloutier
  • Palmi v. Palmi 140 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 1966
  • Palmi v. Palmi 140 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 1966
    iesow v. Kiesow, 270 Minn. 374, 387 , 133 N. W. (2d) 652, 662 , this court said: “The present case is governed by this statutory provision [§ 518.64], and under it the court was clearly without authority to change the division of the real property or the title thereto after the original divorce had been entered and the time for appealing therefrom had expired, * * We held in Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 , that the matter of awarding permanent alimony and support money re
  • Kelley v. Kelley 112 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1962
  • Kelley v. Kelley 112 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1962
    Lamberton v. Lamberton, 229 Minn. 29 , 38 N. W. (2d) 72 ; Louden v. Louden, 221 Minn. 338 , 22 N. W. (2d) 164 ; Swanson v. Swanson, 233 Minn. 354 , 46 N. W. (2d) 878 ; Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .
  • Cloutier v. Cloutier 112 N.W.2d 347 Minn. 1961
  • Cloutier v. Cloutier 112 N.W.2d 347 Minn. 1961
    See, Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 .
  • Swendson v. Swendson 98 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1959
  • Swendson v. Swendson 98 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1959
    In Ruprecht v. Ruprecht, 255 Minn. 80 , 96 N. W. (2d) 14 , we held that the trial court had discretionary power to order the joint tenancy homestead sold and the proceeds applied to pay the claims of creditors.