Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite In re the Marriage of: Denise Louise Spanier v. Terence Urban Spanier, 852 N.W.2d 284.
-
In re the Custody of: O. J. M.-P
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[i]f the family can repair the rift created by the present dispute, either home would be an excellent environment in which to raise [the child].” In a custody modification, the burden is on the movant to “establish on a preliminary basis that there has occurred a significant change of circumstances from the time when the original or amended custody order was issued.”
-
In re the Marriage of: Adetola Omolola Allen v. Temitope Oluwaseyi Allen
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Under this statute, the “prior order” is “either an original order granting custody or a subsequent 6 order modifying custody, and does not include orders that modify parenting time only.”
-
In re the Marriage of: Christine Marie Salvosa v. Alan Douglas Salvosa
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See, d 502, 506-10 (Minn. 2022); -48 (Minn. 1983); -90 (Minn. App. 2014).
- In re the Matter of: Sean Patrick Dempsey v. Martalisbet Horrocks Loman Minn. Ct. App. 2022
-
In re the Marriage of:
Minn. 2022
For example, in describing how Father could meet the changed-circumstances element, in conjunction with an endangerment case, —making it clear that the court considered changed circumstances against the backdrop of the endangerment standard.
-
In re the Custody of: B. L. F., Cherries Chamberlain v. Neil Fleahman
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
see also Barr v. Barr , (reasoning that conflict between parents was not a change but continuation of circumstances known at the time of existing custody order).
-
In re the marriage of: Aaron Peterson v. Brandi Peterson
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
The “change in circumstances must be significant.” Spanier v. Spanier , (quotation omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of: Eboni Yolanda SternJohn v. Julius Royer John
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Changed Circumstances To warrant custody modification, a change in circumstances must be “significant” and have occurred since the ori ginal custody order; “it cannot be a continuation of conditions existing prior to the order.” (quotation omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of: Maria Rothen v. Jason David Rothen
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The change in circumstances must be significant.” (quotation omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of: David Jeffrey Stoeger v. Shara Marie Porter-Stoeger, n/k/a Shara Marie Porter-Casper
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The change in circumstances must be s ignificant.” (quotation omitted).
-
In re: the Custody of the Minor Child V. E.; Ricardo Elizondo v. Katie Irene Halvorson
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
mother] is not able to meet the needs of the child emotionally, physically um, spiritually, what have you, based um, on her limitations.” 4 The change in circumstances must be significant, must have occurred sin ce the original custody order, and “must be a real change and not a continuation of ongoing problems” or “conditions existing prior to the [original] order.” Spanier v. Spanier , (quotations omitted).
-
In re the Marriage of: Samuel Thomas Shea Greenwood v. Kari Ann Greenwood
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A. Change in circumstances To warrant custody modification, the change in circumstances must have occurred since the original custody order; “it cannot be a continuation of conditions existing prior to the order.” Spanier v. Spanier , (quotation omitted).
-
In re the Custody of: A. N. M. L. Jake Robert Lockwood v. Morgan Nicole Nybeck
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Changed Circumstances To warrant custody modification, t he change in circumstances must have occurred since the original custody order; “it cannot be a continuation of conditions existing prior to the order.” Spanier v. Spanier , (quotation omitted).
- In re the Marriage of: Sharon Elizabeth Anderson v. William Thomas Anderson, and County of Dakota, intervenor 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
- In re the Marriage of: Wakisha Nicole Fortwengler, n/k/a Alexa Nicole Schultz v. Chad Michael Fortwengler Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: D. L. D. and M. E. F., Parents 865 N.W.2d 315 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: D. L. D. and M. E. F., Parents
865 N.W.2d 315
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that “district court’s determination as to the existence of a prima facie case for modification [of custody] is reviewed for an abuse of discretion”); (noting that “a relative or foster parent seeking to be an adoptive pl
- In re the Matter of: Calvin James Omtvedt v. Amanda Marie Jansen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
In re the Matter of: Calvin James Omtvedt v. Amanda Marie Jansen
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]here must be a real change and not a continuation of ongoing problems.” d 284, 288 (Minn. App. 2014) (quotation omitted).