Cited by

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fa ct and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotations omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

d 681, 685 (Minn. App. 2015), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

1(g) (2024); -91 (Minn. App. 2015), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotations omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

A district court’s determination of income for child support purposes “must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

Contempt is an extreme remedy that “must be exercised with caution.” rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

6 Husband did not file a motion for amended findings under Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 52.02, and did not move for a new trial under Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 59.01 8 “In the absence of other evidence, there is a rebuttable presumption that a parent is entitled to receive at least 25 percent of the parenting time for the child.” -91 (Minn. App. 2015) (quoting Minn. Stat. § 518.175, subd.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” Newstrand v. Arend , (quotations omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly 8 erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

(quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

I. Income Falavarjani first argues the district court erred in calculating Tabrizi’s income because the trial evidence “illustrate[s] a past regular history of bonus income being received and fail[s] to indicate that bonus income would cease.” “A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

(Minn. 5 Wife does not challenge the district court’s findings related to her income.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” d 681, 685 (Minn. App. 2015) (quota tion omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

Appellate courts “review as-applied challenges to the constitutionality of statutes de novo.” rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

A party may be held in civil contempt when the party “has acted contumaciously, in bad faith, and out of disrespect for the judicial process.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

1 (2022); Lee, d at 635 n.5; rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

Generally, the “determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

Generally, the “determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotations omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

A district court has broad discretion to hold a party in civil contempt when the party “has acted contumaciously, in bad faith, and out of disrespect for the judicial process.” Newstrand v. Arend , (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

A district court’s calculation of in come “must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

For remedial contempt, “the only objective is to secure compliance with an order presumed to be reasonable.” (), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

(recognizing that state has a compelling interest in a child’s best interests in a parenting-time proceeding), review denied (Minn. Dec.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fa ct and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” (quotations omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.

“A court’s determination of income must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” Newstrand v. Arend , (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.

But the Minnesota Supreme Court has characterized contempt as an extreme remedy, and we have “instructed that civil contempt powers must be exercised with 5 caution.” Newstrand v. Arend , (Mi nn.

Mother argues that the district court erred by not suspending father’s 2020 parenting time even though she presented evidence of “the dangers of interstate travel and the COVID-19 pandemic.” “A district court ’s findings of fact underlying a parenting -time decision will be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous.” Newstrand v. Arend , , review denied (Dec 15, 2015).

A court’s determination of income for child-support purposes “must be based in fact and will stand unless clearly erroneous.” 21 (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.

Newstrand v. Arend , review denied (Minn. Dec.

See Newstrand v. Arend , , 690 (Minn. App. 2015) ( holding that father’s “ constitutional freedom of conscience” was not violated by an order requiring father to obtain a psychological evaluation), review denied (Minn. Dec.

at 779 -80, as may a custodial parent’s efforts to undermine the children’s relationship with the noncustodial parent, or to paint a parent in a poor light , Newstrand v. Arend , review denied (Minn. Dec.

review denied (Minn. Dec.

(affirming a district court’s finding regarding endangerment as not clearly erroneous), review denied (Minn. Dec.

review denied (Minn. Dec.