Cited by

16 “An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court resolves the matter in a manner that is against logic and the facts on the record.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell , (quotation omitted).

See, d 328, 333 (Minn. 1997) (stating that when reviewing “mixed questions of law and fact” appellate courts “correct erroneous applications of law, but accord the trial court discretion in its ultimate conclusions and review such conclusions under an abuse of discretion standard”); O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (“An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court resolves the matter in a manner that is ‘against logic and the facts on [the] record.’” ()).

“An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court resolves the matter in a manner that is against logic and the facts on [the] record.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (quoting Rutten v. Rutten , .

matters.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (quotation omitted).

2(b); see also Rose, d at 145; O’Donnell v. O’Donnell

O’Donnell v. O ’Donnell, (quotations omitted).

2(b); Rose, d at 145 ; O’Donnell v. O’Donnell

O’Donnell v. O’Donnell , (quotation omitted).

“[A] stipulation fixing the respective rights and obligations of the parties represents their voluntary acquiescence in an equitable settlement, and the district court should ‘carefully and only reluct antly’ alter its terms.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (Minn .

An abuse of discretion also occurs when the district court rules in a manner that is “against logic and the facts on [the] record.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell

Mother argues that O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, supports upholding stipul ated agreements concerning child support where changes in circumstances are foreseeable by the parties.

While a stipulation which fixes the parties’ child support rights and obligations “does not bar later consideration of whether a change in circumstances warrants a modification,” the district court should alter the support order “carefully and only reluctantly.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (quotations omitted).

“An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court resolves the matter in a manner that is against logic and the facts on the record.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (quotation omitted); (quotation omitted).

Although a child-support stipulation “is one factor to be considered in modification motions, child support relates to nonbargainable interests of children and is less subject to restraint by stipulation than are other dissolution matters.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, 5 (quotation omitted).

“[T]he existence of a stipulation does not bar later consideration of whether a change in circumstances warrants modification.” O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, d 471, 475 (Minn. App. 2004) (quotation omitted).

See O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, (“An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court resolves the matter in a manner that is against logic and the facts on record.”).