Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele, 837 N.W.2d 703.
- In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- In re the Marriage of: Abdihafid Hariri Hassan Yusuf, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(stating that, generally, appellate courts review orders modifying child support “for abuse of discretion”).
-
Kidane Sante Shulbe, petitioner, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(stating that, generally, appellate courts “review orders modifying child support for abuse of discretion”).
- In re the Marriage of: Teresa Marie Nordahl v. Steven Edward Nordahl Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
In re the Marriage of: Teresa Marie Nordahl v. Steven Edward Nordahl
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
the district court reasoned: “Periodic means ‘marked by repeated cycles or happening at regular intervals.’” Based on this definition, the court found that wife’s ESOP did not meet the legal definition of gross income.
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“[C]ertain adjustments or credits may apply based on whether the parents have nonjoint children and 7 each parent’s amount of parenting time.” accord Minn. Stat. §§ 518A.34(c), .36 (2024).
- County of Dakota, ex rel., Michelle Marie Hinz v. Bryan Arthur ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- County of Dakota, ex rel., Michelle Marie Hinz v. Bryan Arthur ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
generally means that a benefit must be actually received by the [party], as opposed to merely vested or owed, in order to constitute income.”
-
In re the Trust of the Thomas Karakash Family Trust and the Ann Karakash Family Trust.
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Rather, corporate profits are deemed to pass through directly to the shareholders on a pro rata basis and are reported on the shareholders’ individual tax returns.” (citation omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
ordinary and necessary expenses.” Minn. Stat. § 518A.30
-
Justin Holtzbauer, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“When the statutory language is plain and unambiguous, we will look only to that language in ascertaining legislative intent.”
- State of Minnesota, by its Commissioner of Transportation, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- In the Marriage of: Sarah Elizabeth Lavins, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-
Alpha News, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“When the statutory language is plain and unambiguous, we will look only to that language in ascertaining legislative intent.”
-
In the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Minn. Stat. § 518A.34(b)(6) (citing Minn. Stat. § 518A.36 (2024)); n.1 (Minn. 2015)
-
In the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(parenting-time modification); (child-support modification).
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“The plain language of Minn. Stat. § 518A.30 gives the district court broad discretion to determine whether to allow a parent to deduct an expense, even an otherwise ordinary and necessary expense, from income.”
- In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
generally means that a benefit must be actually 9 received by the [party], as opposed to merely vested or owed, in order to constitute income.”
- Justin Dean Schultz v. Analisa French Perkins Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
Justin Dean Schultz v. Analisa French Perkins
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Mother argues that the district court abused its discretion by “refus[ing] to address [her] child support modification motion.” Appellate courts generally review orders modifying child support “for abuse of discretion.” 708 (Minn. 2013).
- In re the Marriage of: Tonya M. Keim v. Jeremy R. Keim, County of Fillmore, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- In re the Marriage of: Tonya M. Keim v. Jeremy R. Keim, County of Fillmore, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- In re the Marriage of: Dhimble Ali v. Fahria Mohamed Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
In re the Marriage of: Dhimble Ali v. Fahria Mohamed
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
.30, a district court “must first identify the business’s gross receipts, cost of goods sold (if applicable), and ordinary and necessary expenses, and then apply the formula by subtracting the cost of goods sold and ordinary and necessary expenses from the business’s gross receipts in order to arrive at the parent’s income from self-employment or operation of a business.”
- In re the Marriage of: Andrew Michael Larson v. Julie Christine Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
In re the Marriage of: Andrew Michael Larson v. Julie Christine Larson
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
operation of a business.”
- In re the Marriage of: Emily Lynn Rasmussen v. Nicholas Steven Rasmussen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
In re the Marriage of: Emily Lynn Rasmussen v. Nicholas Steven Rasmussen
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
We review a district court’s factual findings for clear error, questions of law de novo; and the ultimate decision of whether to modify child support for an abuse of discretion, 2
-
In re the Marriage of: Kristina Marie Russell, petitioner, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Specifically, a district court “must take into consideration” certain statutory factors “in setting or modifying child support or in determining whether to deviate upward or downward from the presumptive child support obligation.” Id.
-
In re the Marriage of: Amanda Leigh Davis Floyd, petitioner, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
If a district court sets a support obligation at an amount deviating from the guidelines amount, the district court’s findings must include, in part, “the reasons for the deviation.” (quoting Minn. Stat. § 518A.37, subd.
-
A22-1261
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Haefele v. Haefele , (child-support modification) ; (parenting-time modification) ; (need-based attorney fees).
-
In re the Marriage of: Marlo Renee Nelson, petitioner, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. Stat. § 518A.34(b)(6) (citing Minn. Stat. § 518A.36 (2022)); n.1 (Minn. 2015)
- In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2022
-
In re the Marriage of: Matthew James Beland, petitioner, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
We review a district court’s factual findings for clear error, questions of law de novo, and the ultimate decision to modify child support for an abuse of discretion
- In re the Marriage of: Johnay Marie Fanning, n/k/a Johnay Marie Frandsen, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
-
In re the Marriage of: Kelly Susan LaPara, petitioner, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
generally means marked by repeated cycles, or happening or appearing at regular intervals.” (quotation omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of: Carrie Ann Roth, petitioner, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. Stat. § 518A.43 (2020); d 703, 708 (Minn. 2013).
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(interpreting a prior version of the parenting-expense-adjustment statute de novo).
-
In re the Marriage of: John Alex Walker, petitioner, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Minn. Stat. § 518A.43 (2020); d 703, 708 (Minn. 2013).
- In re the Marriage of: Hirut Woldemariam, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
- In re the Marriage of: Rupam Sinha, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
The CSM then added another $2,472 in gross monthly income based on Jacobs’s share of Bald Man Brewing’s profits; the CS M determined Jacobs’s share of Bald Man Brewing’s profits from the business’s profit-a nd-loss statement and, even though Jacobs did not actually receive hi s share of the profits, 1 included them in his monthly income
- In re the Marriage of: Kristi Rae Pawlak, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
- Nicole A. Nyhus, Respondent, Hennepin County, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
-
In re the Marriage of: Jill Melisa Sinda, petitioner, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
” Haefele v. Haefele , .