Cited by

Martin appeals.1 DECISION We review a district court’s order modifying parenting time for an abuse of discretion.2

(stating that, generally, appellate courts review orders modifying child support “for abuse of discretion”).

(stating that, generally, appellate courts “review orders modifying child support for abuse of discretion”).

“The district court has broad discretion in de termining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”

Motion to Modify Arrearages “The district court has broad discretion when deciding child-support modification issues.” (quotation omitted).

“Reversible abuses of discretion include misapplying the law or relying on findings of fact that are not supported by the record.” (quotation omitted).

A district court abuses its discretion if its decision is based on a misapplication of the law or is “against logic and the facts [in the] record.” 77 (Minn. App. 2017).

A. Statutory Standard “We review de novo the district court’s determination of the appropriate standard to obtain relief.”

“The district court has broad discretion in deciding parenting-time questions and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” d 72, 75 (Minn. App. 2017).

of J.D.T., (noting, when construing the statute addressing termination of parental rights, that the statute’s use of “may” conferred “discretion” on the district court regarding whether to terminate parental rights); (noting a 10 district court’s discretion in modifying “parenting time” in a dissolution proceeding).

However, “after the court incorporates the stipulation into a judgment, the stipulation is treated as a judgment, not as a contract,” and the law “ expressly allows for modification of such judgments as they relate to parenting time.” (emphasis added).

Reversible abuses of discretion include misapplying the law or relying on findings of fact that are not supported by the record.” (quotations and citation omitted).

District courts have “broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and w ill not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” (quotation omitted).

Haefele v. Haefele , (child-support modification) ; (parenting-time modification) ; (need-based attorney fees).

District courts also have “broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues.”

“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting-time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” Shearer v. Shearer , (quotation omitted).

“The district court has broad discretion in determining parenting- time issues and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.” Olson d at 550.

We reiterated Hesse’s in which the parents agreed to equal amounts of parenting time, with the specific days to be determined by them according to the father’s out-of-town work schedule, which varied on a monthly basis.

1a (2022) (emphasis added)