DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Griffin v. Van Griffin, 267 N.W.2d 733.

66 citing documents.

In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(addressing the standard of review in a visitation case).
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(d 733, 735 (Minn. 1978)).
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(legal questions); (factual findings).
Joseph Lee McClain, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Sandee Goldsmith Becker, n/k/a Sandee Scroggs Goldsmith v. Leon L. ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Sandee Goldsmith Becker, n/k/a Sandee Scroggs Goldsmith v. Leon L. ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
A22-1261 Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Haefele, d at 708; Muschik, d at 225.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(citing Griffin v. Van Griffin , ).
In re the Custody of: C. W. P.; William James Peck, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Matter of: Brooks J. Waldron, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Kevin James Stanton, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Richard Minder III, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Nice-Petersen v. Nice - Petersen
In re the Custody of: N. Y. B., James Edward Bono, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Marriage of: Bijoy Raghavan, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Rachel Ann Hughes, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Heather Newman, n/k/a Heather Osagiede, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Matter of: Joseph Loren Conner, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Thomas Gordon Burnett, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Jacob Anthony Pulsifer v. Julie Ann Pulsifer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jacob Anthony Pulsifer v. Julie Ann Pulsifer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A district court’s findings of fact underlying a parenting-time decision will be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous.” ().
In re the Marriage of: Chad William Lenway v. Katherine Anne Brown (f/k/a Katherine Anne Lenway) Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Chad William Lenway v. Katherine Anne Brown (f/k/a Katherine Anne Lenway) Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Becki Anne Suleski, f/k/a Becki Anne Rupe v. Ryan Michael Rupe 855 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Becki Anne Suleski, f/k/a Becki Anne Rupe v. Ryan Michael Rupe 855 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
P. 52.01; d 733, 735 (Minn. 1978).
In Re the Marriage of Dahl v. Dahl 765 N.W.2d 118 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
In Re the Marriage of Dahl v. Dahl 765 N.W.2d 118 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Hoffman v. Ford Motor Co. 587 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Hoffman v. Ford Motor Co. 587 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
1995) rev’d on other grounds
In Re the Welfare of J.D.N. 504 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In Re the Welfare of J.D.N. 504 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Janice has the opportunity to seek the assistance of the court to restrict or even deny visitation that is “likely to endanger the child’s physical or emotional health or impair the child’s emotional development.” Id.; (court may deny visitation upon “persuasive evidence” that it would not serve best interests of the child).
Marriage of Al-Zouhayli v. Al-Zouhayli 486 N.W.2d 10 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Marriage of Al-Zouhayli v. Al-Zouhayli 486 N.W.2d 10 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Visitation between a child and the noncustodial parent is regarded as “a parental right essential to the continuance and maintenance of a child-to-parent relationship.”
Kulla v. McNulty 472 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Kulla v. McNulty 472 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See, (noncustodial father bears burden of persuading trial court that a resumption of visitation with his minor children is warranted.).
Marriage of Bear v. Bear 415 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Bear v. Bear 415 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Digatono v. Digatono 414 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Digatono v. Digatono 414 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Heinlein v. Heinlein 407 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Heinlein v. Heinlein 407 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Home Mutual Insurance Co. v. Chicos 394 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Home Mutual Insurance Co. v. Chicos 394 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1986