DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 175 N.W.2d 148.

198 citing documents.

  • Marriage of Nolan v. Nolan 354 N.W.2d 509 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Marriage of Rutten v. Rutten 347 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1984
  • Marriage of Rutten v. Rutten 347 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1984
    Bollenback v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418, 426
  • Van De Loo v. Van De Loo 346 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Van De Loo v. Van De Loo 346 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • In Re the Marriage of O'Brien v. O'Brien 343 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1984
  • In Re the Marriage of O'Brien v. O'Brien 343 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1984
    “The trial court’s decision [on valuation] is to be affirmed if it has an acceptable basis in fact and principle even though this court may have taken a different approach.” d *853 143, 147 (Minn.1981), citing Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • In Re the Marriage of DuBois v. DuBois 335 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 1983
  • In Re the Marriage of DuBois v. DuBois 335 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 1983
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Ronnkvist v. Ronnkvist 331 N.W.2d 764 Minn. 1983
  • Ronnkvist v. Ronnkvist 331 N.W.2d 764 Minn. 1983
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418, 428
  • Marriage of Taylor v. Taylor 329 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1983
  • Marriage of Taylor v. Taylor 329 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1983
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Marriage of Castonguay v. Castonguay 306 N.W.2d 143 Minn. 1981
  • Marriage of Castonguay v. Castonguay 306 N.W.2d 143 Minn. 1981
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Marriage of Otis v. Otis 299 N.W.2d 114 Minn. 1980
  • Melamed v. Melamed 286 N.W.2d 716 Minn. 1979
  • Melamed v. Melamed 286 N.W.2d 716 Minn. 1979
    See, Minn. Stat. § 518.58 (1978); Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144 , Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Arundel v. Arundel 281 N.W.2d 663 Minn. 1979
  • Arundel v. Arundel 281 N.W.2d 663 Minn. 1979
    See, Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Hansen v. Hansen 275 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1979
  • Hansen v. Hansen 275 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1979
    Peterson v. Peterson, 308 Minn. 365 , Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Minn.St.
  • Bogen v. Bogen 261 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1977
  • Bogen v. Bogen 261 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1977
    See, also, Cooper v. Cooper, 298 Minn. 247 , Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Krohn v. Krohn, 284 Minn. 95 , Cozik v. Cozik, 279 Minn. 91
  • Solon v. Solon 255 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 1977
  • Solon v. Solon 255 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 1977
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • McGough v. McGough 249 N.W.2d 885 Minn. 1977
  • McGough v. McGough 249 N.W.2d 885 Minn. 1977
    Furthermore, “the alimony award should not be limited to the wife’s bare necessities of life, but should be large enough to permit her to enjoy the station in life of the parties prior to the divorce.” Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418, 427
  • Peterson v. Peterson 242 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 1976
  • Peterson v. Peterson 242 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 1976
    In Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418, 426 , we stated: “It is axiomatic that in divorce cases the district court must be accorded a broad discretion with respect to the division of property, allowance of alimony, provision for the custody and support of the children of the parties, and allowances for expenses of litigation.
  • Lenzmeier v. Lenzmeier 231 N.W.2d 71 Minn. 1975
  • Lenzmeier v. Lenzmeier 231 N.W.2d 71 Minn. 1975
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Zager v. Zager, 295 Minn. 517
  • 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
  • Senglaub v. Senglaub 224 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 1974
  • Senglaub v. Senglaub 224 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 1974
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • McCarthy v. McCarthy 222 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 1974
  • McCarthy v. McCarthy 222 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 1974
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Adams v. Adams 222 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1974
  • Adams v. Adams 222 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1974
    While the amount of attorneys fees awarded to plaintiff were reasonable and proper for the services performed, this court has indicated that “a wife with ample resources in hand or in prospect is not * * * dependent on her husband for the funds needed to pay counsel.” Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418, 441
  • Felsheim v. Felsheim 214 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1974
  • Felsheim v. Felsheim 214 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1974
    tatutory provisions, 1 already been expressed adequately and exhaustively in Cooper v. Cooper, 298 Minn. 247 , Ryg v. Kerkow, 296 Minn. 265 , LaBelle v. LaBelle, 296 Minn. 173 , ; Reiland v. Reiland, 290 Minn. 497 , Messer v. Messer, 289 Minn. 449 , Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Vandewege v. Vandewege, 284 Minn. 330 , Hanson v. Hanson, 284 Minn. 321 , Krohn v. Krohn, 284 Minn. 95 , Hansen v. Hansen, 284 Minn. 1 , Smith v. Smith, 282 Minn. 190
  • Cooper v. Cooper 214 N.W.2d 682 Minn. 1974
  • Cooper v. Cooper 214 N.W.2d 682 Minn. 1974
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , Cozik v. Cozik, 279 Minn. 91 , Kucera v. Kucera, 275 Minn. 252 , Albertson v. Albertson, 243 Minn. 212
  • Markegard v. Markegard 197 N.W.2d 726 Minn. 1972
  • Markegard v. Markegard 197 N.W.2d 726 Minn. 1972
    Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418
  • Wilkens v. Wilkens 185 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1971
  • Wilkens v. Wilkens 185 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1971
    See, also, Krohn v. Krohn, 284 Minn. 95 , 169 N. W. (2d) 389 ; Bollenbach v. Bollenbach, 285 Minn. 418 , 175 N. W. (2d) 148 .