Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Brodsky v. Brodsky, 733 N.W.2d 471.

145 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: C. D. T. and A. S. M., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Brodsky v. Brodsky , ( noting we do not address inadequately briefed arguments); Horodenski v. Lyndale Green Townhome Ass’n, (“[E]rror is not presumed on appeal, and the burden of showing error rests on the party asserting it .”).
In re the Marriage of: Richard Leo Bassing, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
While these awards are within the district court’s discretion, “[t]he district court must make findings to explain an award of conduct-based attorney fees.”
In re the Marriage of: Sneha Singh, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In the Matter of: Kathryn Marie Larson, on behalf of Minor Child, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(stating that district court’s failure to address issue “raised only in a conclusory fashion and without supporting .
In re the Marriage of: Matthew James Beland, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., (declining to address an issue absent adequate briefing); d 471, 479 (Minn. App. 2007) (applying Wintz in a family law appeal).
In re the Marriage of: Elizabeth Ann Jones Chidothe, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., (applying Wintz in a family- law appeal).
A21-1064 Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Marriage of: Allison Catherine Buckner, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See Brodsky v. Brodsky , -78 (Minn. App. 4 appropriate to award attorney fees under its inherent authority because the rules and statutes did not fully allow for an appropriate remedy for Robichaud’s “dilatory, non-cooperative, and unreasonable” conduct.
In re the Marriage of: Holly Joy Klick, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State, Dep’t of Labor & d 480, 480 (Minn. 1997) (declining to reach issue not adequately briefed); (applying Wintz in a family law appeal); 6 Mother cites one unpublished case, Robbennolt v. Weigum , WL 1551686, at *2 (Minn. App. Apr.
In re the Marriage of: Lisa Ranelle Appelhof, petitioner, Respondent Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., d 480, 480 (Minn. 1997) (declining to address an inadequately briefed question); (applying Wintz in a family law appeal).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Custody of: C. W. P.; William James Peck, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Marriage of: Jeannine Colleen Scott Salchow, n/k/a Jeannine Colleen Farnsworth, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Marriage of: Donald Wayne Leeke, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc. , (declin ing to review questions that were not adequately briefed); (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
In re the Marriage of: Sarah Meagan Gallo, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc ., (noting that reviewing court may decline to reach issu es that are not adequately briefed); (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
In re the Marriage of: Jessica Elizabeth Solinsky, n/k/a Jessica Elizabeth Grimm, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., (declining to address an inadequately briefed question); see Brodsky v. 12 Brodsky, (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
Nicholas David Wivinus, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See Brodsky v. Brodsky , 15 (providing that this court does not consider issues that are inadequately briefed).
In re the Marriage of: Samuel H. Boimah, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., see Brodsky v. Brodsky , d 471, 479 (Minn. App. 2007) (applying Wintz in a family -law appeal); (stating the supreme court “will not consider pro se claims on appeal tha t are unsupported by either arguments or citations to legal authority.”) Even if we consider the issue, however, our re
Sokkhan Ka, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
County of Dakota, ex rel., Michelle Marie Hinz, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Therefore these questions a re not properly before us. See Brodsky v. Brodsky , (providing that appellate courts do not address issues that have not been adequately briefed).
Lighthouse Management Inc., Plaintiff, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See In re Reichmann Land & Cattle, LLP, n.2 (Minn. 2015) (declin ing to consider “inadequately briefed” argument); (recognizing that inadequately briefed arguments are forfeited).
In re the Custody of Derek Mausolf and Claire Mausolf, Nicholas Mausolf, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(declining to address inadequately briefed arguments) (citing Dep’t of Labor & Indus.
Molly Elizabeth Joyce, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
2015) (declining to consider an “inadequately briefed” argument); (noting that a party who inadequately brie fs an argument waives that argument).
Trung Thien Do, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Ajay K. Israni, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Dia Eldin Jubara, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: John Edward Warrington, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
020), which states th at a district court has discretion to award “additional fees, costs, and disbursements against a party who unreasonably contributes to the length or expense of the proceeding.” “The district court must make findings to explain an award of conduct-based attorney fees, whether in the dissolution proceedings or in a legitimate ancillary proceeding.”
In re the Marriage of: Kevin James Stanton, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
We review an award of conduct -
James Eugene Love, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
d 471, 479 (Minn. App. 2007) (recognizing that inad equately briefed arguments are forfeited).
In re the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: J. S. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Brodsky v. Brodsky , (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying a motion that was procedurally defective).
In re the Marriage of: Amanda Jo Briggs, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Conduct-based attorney fees may be awarded “against a party who unreasonably contributes to the length or expense of the proceeding.” (citing Minn. Stat. § 518.14, subd.
Michael A. Zimmer, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(recognizing that inadequately briefed arguments are forfeited).
Sharon McCrea, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., d 480, 480 (Minn. 1997) (declining to address an inadequately briefed issue); (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
In the Matter of: Holly Elizabeth Often, o/b/o Minor Children, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“A party who inadequately briefs an argument waives that argument.” Brodsky v. Brodsky
In re the Marriage of: Donald Henry Off, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc. , (declining to address an inadequately briefed issue); (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
In re the Matter of: Susan Kelly Lynn, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc., (noting that appellate courts decline to reach issues that are inadequately briefed); (applying Wintz in a family-law appeal).
In re the Marriage of: Jonathon Henry Ortner, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Because husband did not ask the district court to apply Nardini, did not cite Nardini as a basis for relief in his brief to this court, and did not file a reply brief addressing wife’s reliance on Nardini, husband’s 12 (Minn. App. 2007) (noting that this court will not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal that were not raised in the district court and w ill not consider arguments not addressed in briefing); (“[T]his court does not conside
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A. F. P., Parent. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“A party who inadequately briefs an argument waives that argument.”).
Criticized Patrick Simondet, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Adam C. Steele, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
v. Winntz Parcel Drivers, Inc. , (declining to address an inadequately briefed issue); (applying Wintz in a family -law appeal).
Shane Foss, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Michael Anthony Pitts, Appellant. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“A party who inadequately briefs an argument waives that argument.”).
In re the Marriage of: Eboni Yolanda SternJohn, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: David Michael Kedrowski, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Kevin Robert Miller, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
24, 2001); (stating a party who inadequately briefs an issue waives it).
In re the Marriage of: Lauri Sue Browning, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
He asserts that the district court erred by relying on this court ’s decision in Brodsky v. Brodsky
In re the Marriage of: Kimberly Kay Seidel, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Carol Vanerka Stephens, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(a party who inadequately briefs an argum ent waives it).
In re the Marriage of: Laurie S. Morris Hiniker a/k/a Laurie Suzette Morris, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Peggy Ann Doheny, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc. , (declining to address an inadequately briefed issue); (applying Wintz in a family -law appeal).