DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mund v. Mund, 90 N.W.2d 309.

36 citing documents.

  • Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
    5 (1996) (providing court may order either or both parents owing duty of support to child to pay amount reasonable or necessary for child support); Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445 , (concluding obligation of parents to support their children derives from legal and natural duty); see also Walton v. Walton, 789 S.W.2d 64, 67 (Mo.Ct.App.1990) (concluding utmost importance for state to maintain system that strives for orderly and civilized dissolution of family unit)
  • Marriage of Devault v. Waller 494 N.W.2d 92 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • County of Dakota v. Hendrickson 482 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • County of Dakota v. Hendrickson 482 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445 , (obligation of parents to support their children arises out of “legal and natural duty as members of society”).
  • Barnier v. Wells 476 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • Barnier v. Wells 476 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
    Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445
  • Marriage of Karon v. Karon 435 N.W.2d 501 Minn. 1989
  • County of Nicollet v. Larson 421 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1988
  • County of Nicollet v. Larson 421 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1988
    See, e.g., Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445
  • Douglas County Child Support Enforcement Unit v. Cavegn 420 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • Douglas County Child Support Enforcement Unit v. Cavegn 420 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442
  • Bruckman v. Kirkup 404 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Bruckman v. Kirkup 404 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    The obligation of parents derives from their “legal and natural duty” to “take care of [their children] until they are old enough to take care of themselves.” Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445
  • In Re the Welfare of A.L.G. 397 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • In Re the Welfare of A.L.G. 397 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    This obligation derives from the “legal and natural duty as members of society.” Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445
  • Marriage of O'Connor v. O'Connor 386 N.W.2d 395 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Marriage of O'Connor v. O'Connor 386 N.W.2d 395 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Although a child’s right to support may not be waived by parental stipulation, Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 446 , this court has recognized that: [voluntary dissolution stipulations often result from barter concerning child support, spousal maintenance, and property settlement.
  • Marriage of Cavegn v. Cavegn 378 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Marriage of Cavegn v. Cavegn 378 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442, 445-46
  • State Ex Rel. Ondracek v. Blohm 363 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State Ex Rel. Ondracek v. Blohm 363 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    The trial court relied on Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , and Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , as limiting the conclusive effect of dissolution decrees.
  • Marriage of Mulroy v. Mulroy 354 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Marriage of Mulroy v. Mulroy 354 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442
  • Sherlock v. Stillwater Clinic 260 N.W.2d 169 Minn. 1977
  • Sherlock v. Stillwater Clinic 260 N.W.2d 169 Minn. 1977
    Cf. LaBelle v. LaBelle, 302 Minn. 98 , Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442
  • Hedstrom v. Hedstrom 232 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1975
  • Hedstrom v. Hedstrom 232 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1975
    As the court’s memorandum explains, paternity was litigated and, upon plaintiff’s proof, adjudicated in the divorce proceeding; his *590 principal reliance upon Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , is misplaced; and his factual allegations fall far short of establishing fraud, duress, or mistake which could not have been discovered by the exercise of diligence before the judgment was entered — fundamental grounds upon which a final judgment may be set aside.
  • Tammen v. Tammen 182 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1970
  • Tammen v. Tammen 182 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1970
    Kiesow v. Kiesow, 270 Minn. 374 , 133 N. W. (2d) 652 ; Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , 90 N. W. (2d) 309 ; Mark v. Mark, 248 Minn. 446 , 80 N. W. (2d) 621 .
  • Curry v. Felix 149 N.W.2d 92 Minn. 1967
  • Curry v. Felix 149 N.W.2d 92 Minn. 1967
    In Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , 90 N. W. (2d) 309 , the court held that the presumption of legitimacy continues in the face of a divorce court’s finding that there were no issue of a marriage, where a child was bom about two months after the parties’ marriage and the finding in question was made in a default divorce proceeding.
  • Zaine v. Zaine 120 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 1963
  • Zaine v. Zaine 120 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 1963
    Shannon v. Sterling, 248 Minn. 266 , 80 N. W. (2d) 13 ; Atwood v. Atwood, 253 Minn. 185 , 91 N. W. (2d) 728 ; Wicklem v. Wicklem, 229 Minn. 478 , 40 N. W. (2d) 69 ; Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , 90 N. W. (2d) 309 ; Eisel v. Eisel, 261 Minn. 1 , 110 N. W. (2d) 881 .
  • Larkin v. Larkin 113 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1962
  • Larkin v. Larkin 113 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1962
    ecting the amount of such alimony, or support money, * * * and may make any order respecting these matters which it might have made in the original action * * Section 518.18 grants the court the power to “revise and alter such order concerning the care, custody, and maintenance of the children, * * * as the circumstances of the parents and the benefit of the children shall require.” Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , 90 N. W. (2d) 309 ; Fruen v. Fruen, 228 Minn. 391 , 37 N. W. (2d) 417 .