Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re Thulin, 660 N.W.2d 140.

94 citing documents.

Janet H. Krasner v. Gregory Hoffman, et al., Scott Neff, et al., Luke Koski, Lori Schultze, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2018
d 140, 143 (Minn. App. 2003) (citing Spaeth v. City of Plymouth , ).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Adam Howard Torke Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Lianying Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jerome M. Kraskey Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Because Minnesota law requires the use of the clear-and-convincing- evidence standard in commitment cases, and unambiguously puts the burden of pr oduction on the petitioner, we reject this argument.
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Steven P. Lindquist Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michelle R. Fogarty Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Timothy Ayman Bakdash v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See, -26 (Minn. 1984) (concluding that district court retained jurisdiction over a c laim for attorney and expert fees because such a claim “should be treated as a matter independent of the merits of the litigation”); d 140, 143 (Minn. App. 2003) (concluding that the district court retained jurisdiction over a determination regarding continued commitment because it involved “a different standard of proof and a new set of facts” than the initial commitment order).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Tyler Paul Gephart Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of Aaron Michael Hayes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of Aaron Michael Hayes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
4 support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.”
In re the Commitment of: Kevin J. Strong Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Commitment of: Kevin J. Strong Minn. Ct. App. 2016
But this court “review[s] de novo whether there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.”
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brent Charles Nielsen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brent Charles Nielsen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael Thomas Schumann Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael Thomas Schumann Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The district court’s factual findings will not be reversed unless they are clearly erroneous, and we give due regard to the district court’s credibility determinations
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: John Albert Wood Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: John Albert Wood Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“We review de novo whether there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.” d 140, 144 (Minn. App. 2003).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael Alvin Edgar Krengel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael Alvin Edgar Krengel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Although we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error, “[w]e review de novo whether there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.”
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brian Lee Wilbur Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brian Lee Wilbur Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But we review de novo “whether there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.”
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Milton Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Milton Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Kenneth Raymond Newlin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Kenneth Raymond Newlin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But “[w]e review de novo whether there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the district court’s conclusion that appellant meets the standards for commitment.”
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brenda Sue Loewen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Brenda Sue Loewen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Adam Christopher Robb Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Adam Christopher Robb Minn. Ct. App. 2014
e deadline for the review hearing on appellant’s mental-health file.1 II Review of a district court’s order extending a patient’s commitment as mentally ill “is limited to an examination of the district court’s compliance with the statute, and the commitment must be justified by findings based on the evidence at the hearing.”
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Andrew Nordstrom Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Andrew Nordstrom Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Civil Commitment of Crosby 824 N.W.2d 351 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
In re the Civil Commitment of Crosby 824 N.W.2d 351 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Marriage of Perry v. Perry 749 N.W.2d 399 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Marriage of Perry v. Perry 749 N.W.2d 399 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
(holding that district court has jurisdiction over continuing commitment during appeal of initial commitment); see also Spaeth, d at 824-25 (holding that district court retained jurisdiction to calculate amount of attorneys’ fees).
In Re the Civil Commitment of Beaulieu 737 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re the Civil Commitment of Beaulieu 737 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
2004) ( and ), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Breza v. City of Minnetrista 706 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Breza v. City of Minnetrista 706 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
ANALYSIS I. Whether a district court has “subject-matter jurisdiction is a question of law, which we review de novo.” (Minn.App.
In Re Ivey 687 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re Ivey 687 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(personal jurisdiction); (subject matter jurisdiction).
Irwin v. Goodno 686 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Irwin v. Goodno 686 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2004