Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Minnesota State Bar Ass'n v. Divorce Assistance Ass'n, 248 N.W.2d 733.

78 citing documents.

A25-0125 Minn. Ct. App. 2025
D. The Niemalas argue that the district court erred by finding them in contempt without finding that they engaged in “bad faith, disrespect, or intentional disobedience.” They rely on Minnesota State Bar Association v. Divorce Assistance Ass ociation, Inc., d 733 (Minn. 1976) (MSBA), in which the supreme court stated that a district court may impose a contempt sanction “only where the alleged contemnor has acted contumaciously, in bad faith, and out of disrespect for the judicial process.” Id.
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The Fifth Amendment right against self -incrimination may be invoked if the testimony or information “sought would tend to incriminate the witness.” Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc.
In the Matter of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Minn. State Bar Ass ’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass ’n
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n
American Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Inc., et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A sanction for criminal contempt “is absolute and not subject to mitigation if the contemnor alters his future conduct.” Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n
State of Minnesota v. Blair Benedict Oberton Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Blair Benedict Oberton Minn. 2024
(citing Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., ).
Kevin James Kleinschmidt v. Angela Rose Farkash Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Kevin James Kleinschmidt v. Angela Rose Farkash Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In Minnesota State Bar Association v. Divorce Assistance Association, the supreme court explained that a civil-contempt sanction “is inflicted primarily as inducement for future compliance with the order and in vindication of the opposing party’s rights.” (emphasis added); see also Tatum, d at 544 (noting that a civil-contempt sanction vindicates “the rights of a party”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
681 Properties, LLP, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc.
State of Minnesota, by Dr. Brooke Cunningham, Commissioner of Health in her official capacity, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minn. State Bar Ass ’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass ’n, Inc.
In re the Marriage of: Sarah Meagan Gallo, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
1 Based on its finding that mother’s noncompliance with the custody order was, under the circumstances, “reasonable” (or at least excusable), the district court determined that mother did not act “contumaciously, in bad faith, or out of disrespect for the judicial process.” See Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n
Town of West Lakeland, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
v. Swancutt , see also Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
For support, he cites Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc. , which states that “[o]ne limitation on the [dis trict] court’s admittedly broad discretion to impose a contempt sanction is that such sanc tion is appropriate only where the alleged contemnor has acted contumaciously, in bad faith, and out of disrespect for the judicial process.” (M inn.
Samuel Zean, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assis tance Ass’n Inc.
In re the Marriage of: Nader Charles Kazeminy, Petitioner Below, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
For support, appellants cit e to Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc.
In re the Marriage of: Jesse A. Freking, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In dissolution proceedings, holding a party in contempt serves “to secure future compliance of a court order by one party to vindicate the rights of the other party.” (citing Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, ).
Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P. A., f/k/a Mohrman & Kaardal, P. A. v. Gene Rechtzigel, Gene Rechtzigel as … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Mohrman, Kaardal & Erickson, P. A., f/k/a Mohrman & Kaardal, P. A. v. Gene Rechtzigel, Gene Rechtzigel as … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The Fifth Amendment privilege “is properly invoked when the testimony or papers sought would tend to incriminate the witness.” Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 278
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
is failing to obey a court order in favor of the opposing party in a civil proceeding.” Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285
Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Associates, P. A., Nina Mattson 863 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Associates, P. A., Nina Mattson 863 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“It is well established that an order directing a witness to answer questions must be obeyed, and a failure to obey such order subjects the witness to a contempt citation, even if the order was erroneous or improvident.” Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 283, (emphasis added).
State of Minnesota v. Miranda Lynn Jones 857 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Miranda Lynn Jones 857 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Purpose In Minnesota, the purpose of criminal/punitive contempt orders is generally to punish offensive conduct directed against the dignity and authority of the court, Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285, and to “preserve the authority of the court by punishing past misconduct.” (citing Peterson v. Peterson, 278 Minn. 275, ).
Andersen v. State 830 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2013
State v. Nelson 671 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Nelson 671 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Minn. State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, 311 Minn. 276, 285
In Re Contempt of Ecklund 636 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re Contempt of Ecklund 636 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
“[A] witness cannot be cited for contempt for refusing to answer questions on the basis of a valid *590 assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege * * *.” Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 283
In Re Marriage of Crockarell 631 N.W.2d 829 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re Marriage of Crockarell 631 N.W.2d 829 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Minnesota State Bar Ass'n v. Divorce Assistance Assoc., Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 278
Estate of Stollmeyer v. May 580 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Estate of Stollmeyer v. May 580 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 284
State v. Martin 555 N.W.2d 899 Minn. 1996
State v. Tatum 556 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1996
State v. Tatum 556 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1996
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285
State v. Martin 555 N.W.2d 899 Minn. 1996
First, contempt orders have been classified as “civil” or “criminal.” Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285
In Re the Welfare of K.E.H. 542 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In Re the Welfare of K.E.H. 542 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 284
In re Braun 502 N.W.2d 219 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In re Braun 502 N.W.2d 219 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 278
Marriage of Meyer v. Meyer 492 N.W.2d 272 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Marriage of Meyer v. Meyer 492 N.W.2d 272 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, 311 Minn. 276, 285
State v. Garcia 481 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Garcia 481 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n. Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285
In Re the Marriage of Engelby v. Engelby 479 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In Re the Marriage of Engelby v. Engelby 479 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Minnesota State Bar Ass’n v. Divorce Assistance Ass’n, Inc., 311 Minn. 276, 285 , see Minn.Stat.
Marriage of Mahady v. Mahady 448 N.W.2d 888 Minn. Ct. App. 1989

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by