Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Schmitz v. Schmitz, 309 N.W.2d 748.

148 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
5 (establishing formula for district courts to use to determine marital and nonmarital interests in the appreciation of properties acquired before marriage).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
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
In re the Marriage of: Jerry Arthur McDonald, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(addressing calculation of nonmarital interest in asset that changed in value during marriage); -04 (Minn. 2002) (discussing application of Schmitz formula in different contexts).
In re the Marriage of: Diane Faye Meyer, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
When identifying the amounts of marital and nonmarital equity in assets, in which the parties have both marital and nonmarital interests, .
In re the Marriage of: Marisol Jimenez, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
nding that both parties contributed time, effort, and money to improve the house before and during their marriage, and because husband makes no claim regarding the Schmitz analysis2, we conclude that the 2 When a party purchases a real property before a marriage, and marital income has been used to reduce the mortgage balance during marriage, “ , and its progeny is the appropriate method to determine the marital and nonmarital interests in the property.
In re the Marriage of: William T. Bienemann, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
to ensure that the marital estate received its share of the homestead’s appreciation.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Property can have “both mari tal and nonmarital aspects.”
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Leigh Brinkman, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
The district court concluded that “an equitable division of the parti es’ property requires a marital -
A19-1182 Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Property can have “both marital and nonmarital aspects.”
In re the Marriage of: Kristy Ann Ryan, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A18-1408 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Kathleen Marie Tiedke, nka Kathleen Marie Freitag, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
He asserts that the district court misapplied the formula set forth in Schmitz v. Schmitz , and erroneously awarded Freitag interests in his non -marital real property.
In re the Marriage of: Jesse A. Freking, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
The dissolution judgment mer ely award s the homestead to mother as nonmarital property, adopting the appraised value of $63,000 (which neither 5 See Schmitz v. Schmitz , (establishing formula to determine extent of marital and nonmarital interests in asset purchased with nonmarital assets).
In re the Marriage of: Fadumo Salad, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A17-0300 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
But property can have “both marital and nonmarital aspects.” Schmitz v. Schmitz
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Although husband did not make this argum ent to the district court, he argues on appeal that the district court should have employed the Schmitz formula articulated in Schmitz v. Schmitz , to calculate the value of wife’s nonmarital interest.
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(providing a formula for allocating the increase in value of property during a marriage between marital and nonmarital components).
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
Property can have “both marital and nonmarital aspects.”
In re the Marriage of: James Donald Knight v. Maria Pieternella Knight Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: James Donald Knight v. Maria Pieternella Knight Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Property can have “both marital and nonmarital aspects.”
In re the Marriage of: Brian D. Peterson v. Joyce Marie Deeb Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Brian D. Peterson v. Joyce Marie Deeb Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Peterson alternatively argues that, even if Deeb had a right to recover all or a portion of her $75,000 nonmarital equity claim, the district court erred by failing to strictly trace Deeb’s nonmarital interest in the homestead to the parties’ d 748 (Minn. 1981), in its division of the parties’ marital and nonmarital real property interests.
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Ross Wickenhauser v. Denise Esther Wickenhauser, n/k/a Denise Esther Peterson, (A14-0417), and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Ross Wickenhauser v. Denise Esther Wickenhauser, n/k/a Denise Esther Peterson, (A14-0417), and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Marriage of Kerr v. Kerr 770 N.W.2d 567 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Marriage of Kerr v. Kerr 770 N.W.2d 567 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Closing Costs and Taxes The “Schmitz formula may be used to determine marital and nonmarital interests in property acquired during the marriage with a nonmarital down payment.” Antone, d at 102 , ().
Marriage of Baker v. Baker 753 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 2008
Marriage of Baker v. Baker 753 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 2008
nclusion that a homestead purchased with nonmarital assets was marital because much of its value came from improvements made by the couple during the marriage); (finding reversible error when the trial court “failed to adequately account for the distinction between the nonmarital and marital character of the homestead property”); -50 (Minn.1981) (holding that a duplex purchased with nonmarital assets was marital property to the extent that the mortgage had been paid with rental income during the
Marriage of Antone v. Antone 645 N.W.2d 96 Minn. 2002
Marriage of Antone v. Antone 645 N.W.2d 96 Minn. 2002
The court of appeals rejected appellant’s to divide the marital and nonmarital interests in the 18 rental properties.
Senske v. Senske 644 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Senske v. Senske 644 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
The district court determined that respondent had a nonmarital share in the home’s current equity and relied on the principles set forth in Stroh v. Stroh, 38B N.W.2d 402 (Minn.App.1986), to calculate his nonmarital percentage.
In RE MARRIAGE OF FITZGERALD v. Fitzgerald 629 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In RE MARRIAGE OF FITZGERALD v. Fitzgerald 629 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In re the Marriage of Freeing v. Freeing 479 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Freking v. Freking 479 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Freking v. Freking 479 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In calculating the values of appellant's nonmarital interests in the Brewster and Freking farms, the trial court applied the formula developed in Schmitz v. Schmitz , , 750 (Minn. 1981).
In re the Marriage of Freeing v. Freeing 479 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In calculating the values of appellant’s nonmarital interests in the Brewster and Freking farms
Marriage of Swick v. Swick 467 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Swick v. Swick 467 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Burns v. Burns 466 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Burns v. Burns 466 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of McCulloch v. McCulloch 435 N.W.2d 564 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Marriage of McCulloch v. McCulloch 435 N.W.2d 564 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Both parties moved for amended findings, wherein the trial court awarded to respondent a $30,855

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by