Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hopp v. Hopp, 156 N.W.2d 212.

153 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Marianne Michele Thayer v. Larry Frank Thayer Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In the Marriage of: Elizabeth Doree Hanson v. Todd David Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In the Marriage of: Elizabeth Doree Hanson v. Todd David Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
But the court’s role in a civil-contempt proceeding is not to punish but “to make meaningful the rights of one party as against another.” Crockarell, d at 833 ().
City of Long Lake v. City of Orono Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Shawnae Feltus v. Jeffrey Niemala, et al., and RE/MAX Thousand Lakes, Third-Party Defendant Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A. The Niemalas argue that the district court’s November 2023 order did not “clearly define the acts to be performed.” A district court may find a person in contempt only if a 5 “decree of the court clearly defined the acts to be performed.” d 212, 216 (Minn. 1968).
American Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Inc., et al v. Zuobiao Yuan Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Valentin Arkadievich Povarchuk v. Rebecca Joyce Povarchuk Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: David Gordon Wingad v. Janet Marie Wingad Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: David Gordon Wingad v. Janet Marie Wingad Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See, e.g., Minn. Stat. §§ 588.01-.21 (2022) (governing contempt of court); -45 (Minn. 1996) (explaining the classification 15 of contempt as criminal or civil and direct or constructive); d 212, 216-17 (Minn. 1968) (setting forth minimum requirements for civil-contempt proceedings).
John P. Norusis v. City of Marine on Saint Croix Minn. Ct. App. 2024
John P. Norusis v. City of Marine on Saint Croix Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[T]he only objective [of civil-contempt orders] is to secure compliance with an order.”
In re the Custody of H. T. J. and H. W. J., Minor Children, Tyler Raymond Johnson, Jr. … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Indeed, in civil contempt matters, “the only objective is to secure compliance with an order.”
State of Minnesota, by Dr. Brooke Cunningham, Commissioner of Health in her official capacity v. The Iron Waffle … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Swancutt v. Swancutt , (noting that the purpose of a civil contempt proceeding is to secure compliance with an order from the district court ).
In re the Marriage of: Timothy Daniel Lorbiecke v. Wendy Leigh Lorbiecke Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Swancutt, d at 223 ( -17 ( Minn. 1968)); see also Minn. Stat. § 588.04(a) (2022) (“In cases of constructive contempt, an affidavit of the facts constituting the contempt shall be presented to the court .
In re the Marriage of: Michaela Dojcinovic Bachmayer, NKA Michaela Dojcinovic v. Kyle Dalke Bachmayer Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Marriage of: Sarah Meagan Gallo v. Robert Warren Gallo Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Hopp v. Hopp , -17 (Minn. 1968 ).
1648 Properties, LLC, et al v. Morrisun Sund, PLLC, KAW Parks, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2022
For remedial contempt, “the only objective is to secure compliance with an order presumed to be reasonable.” (), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
Nicholas David Wivinus v. Nicole Lynette Nelson Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Tammy Kay Holleman v. Carlo Raphael Holleman Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Dia Eldin Jubara v. Nihad Salah Awad Hamed Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Joel S. Rabbe, et al v. Farmers State Bank of Trimont, et al., First Financial Bank in Winnebago, … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(d 212, 216-17 (Minn. 1968)).
Town of West Lakeland v. Karl E. Auleciems, Susanne M. Auleciems, Ethan Auleciems, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In civil contempt cases, “the only objective is to secure comp liance with an order.” Hopp v. Hopp
In re the Marriage of: James Edward Cook, II v. Hitomi Arimitsu Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Adam C. Steele v. Sarah M. Held Minn. Ct. App. 2019
10 Here, the district court ordered that appellant serve 90 days in jail, but stayed that confinement on the condit ion that appellant comply with the district court’s order s. “[W]hen confinement is directed, the party confined should be able to effect his release by compliance or, in some cases, by his agreement to comply as directed to the best of his ability.”
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: A. S. A. W., E. E. A., J. … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
She relies on caselaw applicable to civil contempt for the proposition that “the party adversely affected by th e alleged failure of the directed party to comply,” i.e., the opposing party, must “appl[y] to the court for aid in compelling performance.” .
In re the Marriage of: Nader Charles Kazeminy Below v. Jibil Eftehar Kazeminy, NJK Holding Corporation, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Jesse A. Freking v. Audra Jo Buxengard f/k/a Audra Jo Freking Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(citing Hopp v. Hopp , ).
In re the Marriage of: Dawn Angela Swenson, f/k/a Dawn Angela Pedri v. Shawn Anthony Pedri, and County … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 173-74
In re the Marriage of: David Allan Kotz v. Edna Vassilovski Minn. Ct. App. 2017
279 Minn. 174-75, d 212, 216-17 (1968).
Foreign Subpoena’s Request for Jurisdictional Subpoena’s for Aaron Jordan and Dwight Walvatne Minn. Ct. App. 2017
v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 175, (concluding that civil contempt “confinement should not be directed to compel a party to do something which he is wholly unable to do”).
In re the Matter of: Jessica Leah Weiss, Hennepin County, intervenor v. Alfred Aaron Griffin Minn. Ct. App. 2017
When holding an individual in contempt, a district court must satisfy certain procedural requirements, including that the district court may not compel a person to do something he is wholly unable to do, but t he contemnor has the burden of proving inability.5 Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 174–75, –17 (1968).
In re the Custody of M. M. L. Nathan James Sands v. Sue Mae Lovick, Dakota County Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Custody of M. M. L. Nathan James Sands v. Sue Mae Lovick, Dakota County Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170
In re the Matter of: Emily M. Pederson v. Scott H. Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Matter of: Emily M. Pederson v. Scott H. Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Before finding a party in civil contempt, the district court considers the factors set forth in Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170
In re the Marriage of: Dawn Angela Swenson v. Shawn Anthony Pedri, County of Dakota, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Dawn Angela Swenson v. Shawn Anthony Pedri, County of Dakota, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2016
4 contempt powers in divorce cases, the only objective is to secure compliance with an order presumed to be reasonable.” Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 173
Donna Jean Sjolander f/k/a Donna Jean Carlson v. Steven Gary Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Donna Jean Sjolander f/k/a Donna Jean Carlson v. Steven Gary Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(citing Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 174–75, –17 (1968)).
In re the Matter of: Jill Marie Newstrand v. Jamison Robert Arend 869 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Matter of: Jill Marie Newstrand v. Jamison Robert Arend 869 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
the only objective is to secure compliance with an order presumed to be reasonable.” Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 173, (“The purpose of civil contempt proceedings is to induce future performance of a valid court order, not to punish for past failure to perform.” (quotation omitted)).
State ex rel. Commissioner of Human Services v. Buchmann 830 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State ex rel. Commissioner of Human Services v. Buchmann 830 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
(noting strong state policy of assuring that children have adequate and timely economic support from their parents); Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 173 , (emphasizing that nonpayment of child support “presents] a serious social problem”).
Marriage of Zaldivar v. Rodriguez 819 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Marriage of Zaldivar v. Rodriguez 819 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
See id.; see also Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 173 , Crockarell, d at 833; D.D.
In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
A civil contempt proceeding must comply with certain procedural requirements, including that the court’s order “clearly define[ ] the acts to be performed” and that “the party charged with nonperformance be given an opportunity to show compliance or his reasons for failure.” Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 174
In Re the Marriage of Melius v. Melius 765 N.W.2d 411 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
In Re the Marriage of Melius v. Melius 765 N.W.2d 411 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
See, e.g., Hopp v. Hopp, 279 Minn. 170, 176
Szarzynski v. Szarzynski 732 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 2007