Hennessy v. Stelton
Cited by
- Marriage of Rogers v. Rogers 622 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 2001
- Marriage of Rogers v. Rogers 606 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
- Rouland v. Thorson 542 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
- Mower County Human Services ex rel. Swancutt v. Swancutt 539 N.W.2d 268 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
- Marriage of Moravick v. Moravick 461 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
- J.M.G. v. J.C.G. 431 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- Jmg v. Jcg 431 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- Marriage of Clark v. Bullard 396 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- Marriage of Tell v. Tell 383 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1986
- Marriage of Erickson v. Erickson 367 N.W.2d 685 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- Packer v. Holm 364 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- In Re the Marriage of Tell v. Tell 359 N.W.2d 298 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Kiesow v. Kiesow 270 Minn. 374
Opinion text
Per Curiam. This is an appeal by plaintiff wife from an order amending a divorce decree primarily by modifying the visitation rights of the husband and reducing child support payments. The wife’s remarriage and her change in place of domicile, considered together, were a sufficient change in circumstances to permit modification of the provisions of the decree as to visitation and child support. We will not reverse the trial court’s decision in these matters absent a clear abuse of discretion. Kiesow v. Kiesow, 270 Minn. 374 , 133 N. W. 2d 652 (1965). Although the record is not a model of either completeness or clarity, a review of what is presented establishes no abuse of judicial discretion. Plaintiff urges that the failure of the trial court to make written findings of fact constitutes reversible error. While the making of findings is surely to be preferred in aid of appellate review of an order amending a divorce decree, it is not technically required. Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure. Affirmed.