Cited by

“We do not overturn a district court’s evaluation and division of property unless the court abuses its discretion.”

v. State, (footnote omitted); (quoting this aspect of Graphic Arts in a marital-dissolution appeal).

Appellate courts “have interpreted nonmarital property narrowly because the Legislature created only five enumerated exceptions to the expansive definition of what constitutes marital property.” -03 (Minn. 2018) (quotations omitted).

“Whether property is marital or nonmarital is a question of law” reviewed de novo, but appellate courts “defer to the district court’s underlying findings of fact and [will] not set the findings aside unless they are clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted).

“[W]hether property is marital or nonmarital is a question of law.” (quotation omitted).

1 (2022); (Anderson, J. dissenting).

If a district court’s findings are clearly erroneous, this court may “set the findings aside.” see Kenney, d at 222-23.

Id; d 297, 302-03 (Minn. 2018) (“We have interpreted nonmarital property narrowly because the [l]egislature created only five enumerated exceptions to the expansive definition of what constitutes marital property.” (quotations omitted)).

“[W]e defer to the district court’s underlying findings of fact” and will not set them aside “unless they are clearly erroneous.” ().

Appellate courts “read contract terms in the context of the entire contract and will not construe the terms so as to lead to a harsh and absurd result.” Brookfield Trade Ctr.

“We do not overturn a district court’s evaluation and division of property unless the court abuses its discretion.” .

(citing this aspect of Olsen).

(property); (maintenance).

n.12 (Minn. 2018) (citing Janssen, d at 756).

3 The district court found that: (1) in 2017, appellant took out a mortgage of $350,000CAD on marital property to purchase farmland in Alberta, Canada, from his father; (2) the worth of the land at that time was disputed and the court was unable to 3Appellant challenges this standard of revi

See, (“[T]he proceeds from a sale of marital property that occurs during dissolution proceedings are marital property subject to the court’s equitable division.”).

ional, “earn-out payments” would depend on the performance of Talenti during 2015 and 2016 : “The agreement specified that the earn -out payments would be calculated according to a formula that was based on the amount by which annual sales exceeded an established ‘floor’ ($120 million in net sales), multiplied by a set multiplier (1.75), and subtracting certain variable costs.”

But an appellate court will “defer to the district court’s underlying findings of fact and [will] not set the findings aside un less they are clearly erroneous.”

An appellate court will not “overturn a district court’s evaluation and division of property unless the court abuses its discretion.” Gill v. Gill

1, 2 (2018); see Gill v. Gill , (defining and explaining marital property).