Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re the Marriage of Dahl v. Dahl, 765 N.W.2d 118.

126 citing documents.

In re the matter of: Eric Thurman Clinton v. Gabriela Kathleen Linder Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” (quoting Dahl v. Dahl , ).
Michael Anthony Guardia v. Jennifer Marie Mattson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
D E C I S I O N “The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” 123 (Minn. App. 2009).
In re the Marriage of: Amanda Lynn Johnson, n/k/a Amanda Lynn Leathers v. Benjamin Patrick Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abu se of that discretion.” Dahl v. Dahl
In re the Marriage of: James Edward Cook, II v. Hitomi Arimitsu Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Custody of: R. T. R., C. T. R., and S. C. T. R., Robby Romero … Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Matter of: Awal Ismael Hussein v. Lensa Mohamed Musa Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(noting that court must “demonstrate an awareness and application of the 25% presumption when the issue is appropriately raised and the court awards less than 25% parenting time”).
In re the Marriage of: Nicole Marie Edwards v. Christopher Michael Edwards Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Dodamwalage Dinesh Jayawardena v. Mallikaarachchige Sathsarani Jayawardena Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Custody of: B. L. F. Cherries Chamberlain v. Neil Fleahman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
We review a district court’s parenting-time decision for abuse of discretion, affirming the court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous
In re the Marriage of: David Michael Kedrowski v. Olga Kedrowski Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” Dahl v. Dahl
In re the Marriage of: Sheree Rosett Curry v. Michael David Levy Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Dahl v. Dahl , (citation omitte d).
In re the Matter of: Robert Burdette v. Jacinda Raiche Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: L. D.-P., Parent Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Paul Thomas Hesse v. Toni Renee Wingrove Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Marriage of: Linde Anne Sayen v. Michael Stephen Sayen Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Custody of J. M. H. and A. M. H. Roland John Hillstrom v. Heather Joy … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting -time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Thomas Gordon Burnett v. Daniela Estefania Burnett Torres Parra Minn. Ct. App. 2018
at 217 ( , 124 (Minn. App. 2009)).
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Elizabeth Anderson v. William Thomas Anderson, and County of Dakota, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Because appellate courts recognize that a district court has broad discretion to decide ques tions of parenting time, Olson v. Olson , appellate courts will not reverse a parenting-time decision unless the district court abused its discretion by misapplying the law or by making findings unsupported by the record
In re the Marriage of: Tracy Wong Belcher v. Benjamin Moore Belcher, III Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: David Allan Kotz v. Edna Vassilovski Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Matter of: Sari Rae Sheeley, n/k/a Sari Rae Moen v. James Harvey Sheeley Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Modifications [of parenting time] are less substantial changes in parenting time.” Dahl v. Dahl , (quotation omitted).
In re the Matter of: Sedina Glover, Hennepin County Below v. Clement Olertey Totimeh Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Christensen v. Healey 899 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Christensen v. Healey 899 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
ANALYSIS “The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” (Minn.App.
In re the Marriage of: Molly Kathryn Sanders, joint-petitioner v. Johannes Moen, joint-petitioner Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Rebecca Lynn McNeil v. Mark Aaron McNeil Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Rebekah L. Bennett v. Kevin E. Bennett Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Crystol Kevan Caudullo v. Michael Anthony Caudullo Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A district court’s findings of fact underlying a parenting-time decision will be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous.”
In re the Marriage of: Sheree Rosett Curry v. Michael David Levy Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The district court has broad discretion to determine “parenting - time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Matter of: J. S. S v. G. I. S Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The district court has broad discretion in determ ining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Justin David Shearer v. Mandy Jane Shearer 891 N.W.2d 72 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Justin David Shearer v. Mandy Jane Shearer 891 N.W.2d 72 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
County of Washington, Danielle Kathryn Richardson v. Brandon Christopher Fischer Minn. Ct. App. 2017
County of Washington, Danielle Kathryn Richardson v. Brandon Christopher Fischer Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Kylie Jo McCuen v. Joshua William McCuen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Kylie Jo McCuen v. Joshua William McCuen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jessica Leah Weiss v. Alfred Aaron Griffin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jessica Leah Weiss v. Alfred Aaron Griffin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” d 118, 123 (Minn. App. 2009).
Thomas C. Rubey v. Valerie A. Vannett Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Thomas C. Rubey v. Valerie A. Vannett Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
Donna Jean Sjolander f/k/a Donna Jean Carlson v. Steven Gary Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Donna Jean Sjolander f/k/a Donna Jean Carlson v. Steven Gary Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
5(b) (2014); –24 (Minn. App. 2009) (stating that “[a] restriction occurs when a change to parenting time is substantial” and that “[m]odifications are less substantial changes in parenting time” (quotations omitted)).
In re the Marriage of: Emily-Jean Chinwendu Aguocha v. Ikechukwu Hisa Aguocha Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Emily-Jean Chinwendu Aguocha v. Ikechukwu Hisa Aguocha Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A “district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“To determine whether a reduction in parenting time constitutes a restriction or modification, the court should consider the reasons for the change as well as the amount of the reduction.”
In re the Marriage of: Ryan Chetly Ramsammy v. Ashley Marie Ramsammy Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Ryan Chetly Ramsammy v. Ashley Marie Ramsammy Minn. Ct. App. 2015
5(a) “Determining the legal standard applicable to a change in parenting time is a question of law and is subject to de novo review.”
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015