Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Zander v. Zander, 720 N.W.2d 360.

70 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Amy Daiker Werger v. Brett Michael Werger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Amy Daiker Werger v. Brett Michael Werger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
other than those made by the [district] court does not show that the court’s findings are 10 defective.” see Elliott v. Mitchell, 311 Minn. 533, 535, (affirming findings, but noting that evidence might have supported another conclusion); (observing that, while the record could support a different decision, “this court may not substitute its judgment for that of the district court”), review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Marriage of: Crystol Kevan Caudullo v. Michael Anthony Caudullo Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Crystol Kevan Caudullo v. Michael Anthony Caudullo Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Appellate review of a custody determination is limited to determining whether the district court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.” -66 (Minn. App. 2006), review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Marriage of: Christina Marie Rexine v. Joey Lee Rexine Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christina Marie Rexine v. Joey Lee Rexine Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Marriage of: Jodi Ann Larson v. Brian Allen Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jodi Ann Larson v. Brian Allen Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
s other than those made by the [district] court does not show that the court’s findings are defective.” see Elliott v. Mitchell, 311 Minn. 533, 535, (affirming findings, but noting that evidence might have supported another conclusion); Zander v. Zander, 3 (observing that, while the record could support a different decision, this court may not substitute its judgment for that of the district court), review denied (Minn. Nov.
John Green v. Greg Kellen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
John Green v. Greg Kellen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
–65 (Minn. App. 2006), review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn R. Rauworth, n/k/a Kathryn R. Kendall v. Barry L. Rauworth Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn R. Rauworth, n/k/a Kathryn R. Kendall v. Barry L. Rauworth Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When considering a rule 52.02 motion, the district court is required to “apply the evidence as submitted during the trial of the case, and may neither go outside the record, nor consider new evidence.” (quotations omitted), review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Marriage of: Peiliang Yuan v. Te Hao, and In re the Matter of: Te Hao … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Peiliang Yuan v. Te Hao, and In re the Matter of: Te Hao … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
d 360, 364 (Minn. App. 2006), review denied (Minn. Nov.
Kristina Hacker Tompach v. Paul Christopher Tompach Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Kristina Hacker Tompach v. Paul Christopher Tompach Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(upholding custody determination and observing that, while record could support different custody decision, we may not substitute our judgment for that of district court), review denied (Minn. Nov.
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
But “[a] motion to amend findings must be based on the files, exhibits, and minutes of the court, not on evidence that is not a part of the record.” review denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Matter of: Ronald Lee Kish v. Kimberly Sue Wirth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Matter of: Ronald Lee Kish v. Kimberly Sue Wirth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
review denied (Minn. Nov.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by