Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hertz v. Hertz, 229 N.W.2d 42.

170 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Laura Marie Knutsen v. Peder Nels Knutsen Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In Re the Marriage of Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“[I]t is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” (); rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
We give broad deference to the district court because “valuation is necessarily an approximation in many cases.” Maurer, d at 606 ().
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
We will sustain the fact-finder’s property valuation “if it falls within the limits of credible estimates made by competent witnesses even if it does not coincide exactly with the estimate of any one of them.” ; d 305, 310 (Minn. 1955) (“It is, however, the rule in this state that a [district] court is not bound by the opinion of any witness concerning values and that its findings will ordinarily be sustained if within the limits of the evidence as to value
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
14 an approximation in many cases, and it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Valuation is often an approximation “and it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In re the Marriage of: Bette Lou Gubbe Slag, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[V]aluation is necessarily an approximation in many cases.”
In re the Marriage of: Ritesh Singh, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Exactitude is not required of the trial court in the valuation of assets in a dissolution proceeding; it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” Johnson v. 7 Johnson, ().
In re the Marriage of: Pamela Jo Pemberton, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See Hertz v. Hertz , (stating that factfinder’s 4 Although we agree w ith husband that the district c ourt’s finding that the COVID-19 pandemic affected the properties’ values is clearly erroneous because it is not based on any evidence in the record, we nevertheless affirm on this issue because evidence in the reco
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Even so, “valuation is necessarily an approximation in many cases, and it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
Inland Edinburgh Festival, LLC, Minn. 2020
of Carver , (noting that the tax court is not bound to accept the valuation opinion of an appraiser); (stating that a trial court can make adjustment to an expert’s valuation opinion “if it falls within the limits of credible estimates made by competent witnesses”).
In re the Marriage of: Zondra A. Thompson, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
We begin by noting that the district court’s determination of market value “should be sustained if it falls within the limits of credible estimates made by competent witnesses.”
In the Marriage of: Debra Lynn Ober, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Johnson v. Johnson , ().
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Nelson, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Thus, the market valuation determined by the tri er of fact should be sustained if it falls within the limits of credible estimates m ade by competent witnesses even if it does not coincide exactly with the estimate of any o ne of them.”
In re the Marriage of: Amy Alyssa Post, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Camilla Renae Lee, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Laurie S. Morris Hiniker a/k/a Laurie Suzette Morris, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Gill v. Gill 919 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Hertz v. Hertz , 304 Minn. 144, 145
In re the Marriage of: Mandeep Singh Sodhi, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(quoting Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145, d 42, 44 (1975)).
A17-0300 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
1979) (citing Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145, ).
In re the Estate of Mae Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Estate of Mae Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Assigning a specific value to an asset is a finding of fact.” Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145
In re Minnwest Bank Litigation Concerning Real Property in Otsego, Minnesota, Minnwest Bank v. RTB, LLC 873 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re Minnwest Bank Litigation Concerning Real Property in Otsego, Minnesota, Minnwest Bank v. RTB, LLC 873 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
aiming that the district court clearly erred when it assigned the $1.6 million purchase price as the pre-encroachment valuation because that price also included RTB’s interest in Outlot A.4 But “[a]ssigning a specific value to an asset is a finding of fact; disputes as to asset valuation are to be addressed to the trier of fact, and conflicts are to be resolved in that court.” Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145
In re the Marriage of: Helen Kernik v. James Kernik, Judith Murphy Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Helen Kernik v. James Kernik, Judith Murphy Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145
Eden Prairie Mall, LLC v. County of Hennepin 797 N.W.2d 186 Minn. 2011
Eden Prairie Mall, LLC v. County of Hennepin 797 N.W.2d 186 Minn. 2011
We have characterized a valuation as generally reasonable “if it falls within the limits of credible estimates made by competent witnesses,” Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145
Lee v. Lee 775 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 2009
Lee v. Lee 775 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 2009
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 146
Marriage of McIntosh v. McIntosh 740 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Marriage of McIntosh v. McIntosh 740 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145
Stageberg v. Stageberg 695 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Stageberg v. Stageberg 695 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , see Minn. R. Civ.
Rainforest Cafe, Inc. v. State Investment Board 677 N.W.2d 443 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Rainforest Cafe, Inc. v. State Investment Board 677 N.W.2d 443 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Co. v. Nat’l Tea Co., 240 Minn. 422, 428 , see Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , (stating “[ajssigning *451 a specific value to an asset is a finding of fact”).
Marriage of Prahl v. Prahl 627 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Prahl v. Prahl 627 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
An appellate court will not reverse a district court’s valuation of an asset unless it is “clearly erroneous on the record as a whole.” Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , (citations omitted).
Maurer v. Maurer 623 N.W.2d 604 Minn. 2001
Maurer v. Maurer 623 N.W.2d 604 Minn. 2001
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , (per curiam).
Marriage of Lund v. Lund 615 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Marriage of Lund v. Lund 615 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , see also Minn. R. Civ.
Marriage of Carrick v. Carrick 560 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Marriage of Carrick v. Carrick 560 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
See Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 147-48 , (imputing entire net income of obligor's company to obli-gor's income for purposes of setting maintenance).
Kitchar v. Kitchar 553 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Kitchar v. Kitchar 553 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Hertz v. Hertz, 304 Minn. 144, 145 , (value trial court arrives at must be within a reasonable range of figures).
Marriage of Sweere v. Gilbert-Sweere 534 N.W.2d 294 Minn. Ct. App. 1995