Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Thompson v. Thompson, 739 N.W.2d 424.

82 citing documents.

In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Subject to the right of appeal, a dissolution judgment and decree is final when entered, unless in a timely motion a party establishes a statutory basis for reopening the judgment and decree.” , 428 (Minn. App. 2007) (citing Minn. Stat. § 518.145, subds.
In the Marriage of: Jarrid Daniel DeGolier v. Jessica Jean DeGolier Baron, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In the Marriage of: Jarrid Daniel DeGolier v. Jessica Jean DeGolier Baron, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In re the Marriage of: Todd Charles Bork v. Carolyn Mitsu Bork Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In re the Marriage of: Todd Charles Bork v. Carolyn Mitsu Bork Minn. Ct. App. 2026
The moving party must present more than merely a new set of circumstances or an unforeseen change of a known circumstance to reopen a judgment and decree.” -31 (Minn. App. 2007) (-34 (Minn. App. 2001), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
Eric Michael Kroiss, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Subject to the right of appeal, a dissolution judgment and decree is final when entered, unless in a timely motion a party establishes a statutory basis for reopening the judgment and decree.”
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“If there is evidence to support the district court’s decision, an abuse of discretion will not be found.”
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Whether to hold an evidentiary hearing on a motion generally is a discretionary decision of the district court, which we review for an abuse of discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Kyle Ryan Johnson, A v. Danielle Marie Gilbert, B, Appellant.... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Kyle Ryan Johnson, A v. Danielle Marie Gilbert, B, Appellant.... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“The moving party bears the burden of establishing a basis to reopen the judgment and decree.”
In re the Marriage of: Robert Thomas Nord, A v. Katherine Elizabeth Bowers, B, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Robert Thomas Nord, A v. Katherine Elizabeth Bowers, B, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Brenda Lee Christiansen v. Timothy Nels Christiansen, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Brenda Lee Christiansen v. Timothy Nels Christiansen, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
P. 43.05 (stating that “[w]henever a motion is based on facts not appearing of record, the court may hear the 6 matter on affidavits presented by the respective parties”); (noting that an evidentiary hearing is not necessary in family-law matters “unless the district court determines that there is good cause for a hearing”).
In re the Marriage of: Matthew Beland, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“Whether to hold an evidentiary hearing on a motion generally is a discretionary decision of the district court, which we review for an abuse of discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Christine Marie Salvosa, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“The moving party bears the burden of establishing a basis to reopen the judgment and decree.”
A21-1725 Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Instead, the party seeking to reopen a dissolution judgment “ must present more than merely a new set of circumstances or an unforeseen change of a known circumstance to reopen a judgment and decree.” -31 (Minn. App. 2007).
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A. M. L., Minn. Ct. App. 2022
We note that when evidence relevant to a factual issue consists of conflicting testimony, as here, the district court’s decision is “necessarily based on a determination of witness credibility, which we accord great deference on appeal.” -29 (Minn. App. 2007).
In re the Marriage of: Kristin Grace Logdahl, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“Subject to the right of appeal, a dissolution judgment and decree is final when entered, unless in a timely motion a party establishes a statutory basis for reopening the judgment and decree.”
In re the Marriage of: Brad Allen Friesz, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“The moving party bears the burden of establishing a basis to reopen the judgment and decree.” .
In re the Marriage of: Robert H. Brandtjen, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Bobbi Jean Suhonen, n/k/a Bobbi Jean Lindsay, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“Subject to the right of appeal, a dissolution judgment and decree is final when entered, unle ss in a timely motion a party establishes a statutory basis for reope ning the judgment and decree.”
In re the Marriage of: Mary Ann Fenlon, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Tammy Kay Holleman, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Thompson v. Thompson , (Minn. App .
In re the Custody of: N. Y. B., James Edward Bono, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“[I]t is presumed that a motion in family law, other than a motion for contempt, will be decided without an evidentiary hearing , unless the district court determines that there is good cause for a hearing.” (citing Minn. R. Gen.
In re the Marriage of: Richard T. Hudgins, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Marriage of: Jeffrey Alan Fish, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Matter of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A finding is clearly erroneous if the reviewing court i s “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”
In re the Estate of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(explaining that it is within the district court’s discretion to grant evidentiary hearings).
In re the Marriage of: Greta Mae Markuson, n/k/a Greta Mae Garcia, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Garcia’s d 424, 430 (Minn. App. 2007), does not support her argument that a hearing was necessary here.
In re the Marriage of: Rachel Ann Wexler, f/k/a Rachel Gerr, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Laurie S. Morris Hiniker a/k/a Laurie Suzette Morris, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Instead, the party seeking to reopen a dissolution judgment “must present more than merely a new set of circumstances or an unforeseen change of a known 17 circumstance to reopen a judgment and decree.” -31 (Minn. App. 2007).
In re the Marriage of: Carolynn Bitker, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
d 424, 428 (Minn. App. 2007).
In re the Marriage of: Keith Jonathan Hempel, II, Decedent, Tobin Hempel and Joshua D. Krsnak, personal representatives … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
7 (citing Minn. Stat. § 518.145, subds.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Thompson v. Thompson , (citing Minn .
In re the Marriage of: Linde Anne Sayen, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(noting that appellate courts generally consider only those issues presented and considered by the district court); Thompson v. Thompson , (applying Thiele in declining to reach issue raised for first time on appeal of the denial of a motion to reopen judgment in dissolution of marriage).
In re the Marriage of: Lori Elaine Coleal, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Mashell Marie Bjorge v. Jason Willard Maahs Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Mashell Marie Bjorge v. Jason Willard Maahs Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Christopher John Anton v. Romona L. Sparks, f/k/a Romona L. Anton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Christopher John Anton v. Romona L. Sparks, f/k/a Romona L. Anton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“If there is evidence to support the district court’s decision, an abuse of discretion will not be found.”
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Darrell Hicks v. Beth Marie Hicks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Darrell Hicks v. Beth Marie Hicks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
2(5), only upon a showing of “the development of circumstances substantially altering the information known when the dissolution judgment and decree was entered.” (establishing the criterion for inequitability of the prospective application of a judgment) (quotation omitted).
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
P. 61 (requiring harmless error to be ignored); (applying rule 61).
In re the Marria ge of: Marla Jean Knapp v. James Alan Knapp 883 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marria ge of: Marla Jean Knapp v. James Alan Knapp 883 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
3 ANALYSIS “Subject to the right of appeal, a dissolution judgment and decree is final when entered, unless in a timely motion a party establishes a statutory basis for reopening the judgment and decree.” see also Minn. Stat. § 518.145, subd.
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn Suzanne Neufeld, f/k/a Kathryn Suzanne Hare v. Robert Russell Hare Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn Suzanne Neufeld, f/k/a Kathryn Suzanne Hare v. Robert Russell Hare Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Whether to hold an evidentiary hearing on a motion generally is a discretionary decision of the district court, which we review for an abuse of discretion.”