Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Johnson v. Johnson, 277 N.W.2d 208.

121 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
Put differently, “Exactitude is not required of the [district] 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.” d 208, 211 (Minn. 1979) (citing Hertz, d at 44).
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The CastleRock Group, LLC, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The only precedential case the appellants rely on to support their argument that an outdated valuation may nevertheless support a valid damages award, –11 (Minn. 1979), does not involve the complex investment arrangement involved here.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
10 the other party receives the benefit of payment” (quotation omitted)), rev. denied (Minn. May 29, 1986); (stating that, for district court valuations, “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures”).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The district court need not be exact in its valuation of assets; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
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: Xiaoyan Sun, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
The district court is not required to be exact in its valuation of assets; on appellate review “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” .
In re the Marriage of: Donald Floyd Deeble, Jr. v. Hayley Elizabeth Espelien, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Donald Floyd Deeble, Jr. v. Hayley Elizabeth Espelien, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
An appellate court does not require the district court to be mathematically exact in its valuation of assets, because “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In re the Marriage of: Kristin Grace Logdahl, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
We do not require the district court to be exact in its valuation of assets; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Leigh Brinkman, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Thus, generally, appellate courts do not require the district court to be exact in its finding of the valuation of an asset; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” d 208, 211 (Minn. 1979).
In re the Marriage of: Cynthia A. Linnerooth, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
An appellate court does not require the district court to be exact in its valuation of assets; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
In the Marriage of: Debra Lynn Ober, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Johnson v. Johnson , ().
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Kathleen Marie Tiedke, nka Kathleen Marie Freitag, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(stating value must be within “reasonable range of figures”).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“[I]t is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
Gill v. Gill 919 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2018
A17-0300 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
But we do not require the district court to be exact in its valuation of assets; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” (Minn .
In re the Marriage of: Michelle Beth Kremer v. Robbie Michael Kremer 889 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Michelle Beth Kremer v. Robbie Michael Kremer 889 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
P. 61 (requiring appellate courts to ignore harmless error); (“Exactitude is not required of the [district] 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.”).
In re the Marriage of: Jennifer Dawn Nyakundi v. Gilbert Ogamba Nyakundi Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Jennifer Dawn Nyakundi v. Gilbert Ogamba Nyakundi Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[W]here the record is reasonably clear and the facts not seriously disputed, the judgment of the trial court can be upheld in the absence of trial court findings made pursuant to Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure.” Roberson v. Roberson, 296 Minn. 476, 478, (citing Roberson); (stating that “[e]xactitude 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”).
In re the Marriage of: Todd Emil Nelson v. Leslie Ann Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Todd Emil Nelson v. Leslie Ann Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“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.”
In re the Marriage of: Carrie Marie Lauderdale v. Scott James Lauderdale Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Carrie Marie Lauderdale v. Scott James Lauderdale Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The district court’s valuation determination need not be exact—only “within a reasonable range of figures.”
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
“[I]t is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
Marriage of Passolt v. Passolt 804 N.W.2d 18 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Marriage of Passolt v. Passolt 804 N.W.2d 18 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
We do not require a district court to be exact in its valuation of assets so long as the value “lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
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
An appellate court does not require the district court to be exact in its valuation of an asset; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” (citing Hertz, 304 Minn. at 145 , d at 44 ).
Stageberg v. Stageberg 695 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Stageberg v. Stageberg 695 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” see Hertz, 304 Minn. at 145 , d at 44 .
Maus v. Galic 669 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Maus v. Galic 669 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(capital accounts are treated as additional, separate assets).
Maurer v. Maurer 623 N.W.2d 604 Minn. 2001
Maurer v. Maurer 623 N.W.2d 604 Minn. 2001
See Aaron, d at 153 ; O’Brien v. O’Brien
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
The lower court need not be exact in its valuation of assets; “it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
Schreifels v. Schreifels 450 N.W.2d 372 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Schreifels v. Schreifels 450 N.W.2d 372 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
The net income determination is within a “reasonable range of figures.”
Marriage of Burwell v. Burwell 438 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Marriage of Burwell v. Burwell 438 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Marriage of Bury v. Bury 416 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Bury v. Bury 416 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The trial court is not required to be mathematically exact in its valuation of assets as long as “the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.”
Marriage of Southwell v. Southwell 413 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1987