Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re the Marriage of Abuzzahab v. Abuzzahab, 359 N.W.2d 329.

32 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Elena Vladimirovna Tokarev v. Vladimir Efimovich Tokarev Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Elena Vladimirovna Tokarev v. Vladimir Efimovich Tokarev Minn. Ct. App. 2017
1978 Minn. Laws ch. 772, § 59, at 1087; (“[T]he moving party must demonstrate both a substantial change in income or needs and unfairness caused by that change.”).
Marriage of O'Donnell v. O'Donnell 678 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Marriage of O'Donnell v. O'Donnell 678 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
This court considered a claim of substantial change in circumstances stemming from an increase of expenses resulting from a
Marriage of Kruschel v. Kruschel 419 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Kruschel v. Kruschel 419 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Hall v. Hall 417 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Hall v. Hall 417 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Jensen v. Jensen 414 N.W.2d 742 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Jensen v. Jensen 414 N.W.2d 742 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Erickson v. Erickson 409 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Erickson v. Erickson 409 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-33 (Minn.Ct.App.1984) (trial court was within its discretion in disregarding $3300 in interest earned on property settlement money that was temporarily invested, because that source of income was temporary and nonrecurring).
Marriage of Meyers v. Meyers 409 N.W.2d 532 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Meyers v. Meyers 409 N.W.2d 532 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(trial court was within its discretion in disregarding $3300 in interest respondent had earned on property settlement money she had temporarily invested because the source of income was temporary and nonrecurring).
Marriage of Burdick v. Burdick 407 N.W.2d 136 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Burdick v. Burdick 407 N.W.2d 136 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kroening v. Kroening 390 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Kroening v. Kroening 390 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Savoren v. Savoren 386 N.W.2d 288 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Savoren v. Savoren 386 N.W.2d 288 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Pekarek v. Wilking 380 N.W.2d 161 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Pekarek v. Wilking 380 N.W.2d 161 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Sand v. Sand 379 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Sand v. Sand 379 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
appeal, leave little doubt that permanent maintenance is often more honored than adhered to.
Ruud v. Ruud 372 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Ruud v. Ruud 372 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Sefkow v. Sefkow 372 N.W.2d 37 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Sefkow v. Sefkow 372 N.W.2d 37 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Frederiksen v. Frederiksen 368 N.W.2d 769 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Frederiksen v. Frederiksen 368 N.W.2d 769 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Germain v. Germain 367 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Germain v. Germain 367 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Nonetheless, which states that when awarding attorneys fees a court must consider whether a party requires financial assistance to enable him to contest the proceedings.