Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In RE MARRIAGE OF FITZGERALD v. Fitzgerald, 629 N.W.2d 115.

184 citing documents.

City of Shoreview, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
making this determination, asserting that pro se pleadings should be liberally construed and that “there was sufficient indicia of appella nts’ intent to contest the charges.” Amro acknowledges that, “[a]lthough some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants,” they “are generally held to th e same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: K. B. and T. B., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
Peter Haluszka, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
However, pro se litigants “are generally held to the same standards as attorneys,” and the ULJ remains neutral, even when assisting a self-represented party in the presentation of their evidence, Stassen, d at 32.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Father cites no legal authority in support of this argument, see Grigsby, d at 726 (concluding that arguments submitted without legal authority are waived), and this court has repeatedly held that “pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys.”
In re the Marriage of: Esther Jayasheela Potti, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
ommunicating to the court what it is [they] want [] accomplished and by whom.” Carpenter v. Woodvale, Inc. , see Gruenhagen v. Larson , (stating that court will not , generally, modify ordinary rules and procedures on the grounds that a pro se party lacks the skills and expertise of an attorney); Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorne
Washington County CDA, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 115, 119 (Minn. App. 2001).
North Mill Equipment Finance, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Se lf-represented litigants “are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.” Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (Mi nn.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly 13 emphasized that pro se litigants are generally he ld to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”
Jessica Lin Love, n/k/a/ Jessica Lin Lopez Love, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
While courts typically accord some “leeway” to self -represented litigants, such litigants are “still not relieved of the burden of, at least, adequately communicating to the court what it is [ the party] wants accomplished and by whom.” Carpenter v. Woodvale, Inc., (citation omitted); see also Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (stating that “[a]lthough some accommodations may be mad e for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standa
In re the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Matthew Lee DeRosia. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Samuel Zean, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.” (providing that a party that appears pro se “is held to the standard of an attorney in presenting his appeal”).
In the Marriage of: Debra Lynn Ober, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (citations omitted) .
Jeffrey James Nathe, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See, e.g., Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (noting that some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, but this court generally holds pro se litigants to the same standard as attorneys and they must comply with court rul es).
Linde Sayen, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
least, adequately communicating to the court what it is he wants accomplished and by whom.” Carpenter v. Woodvale, Inc. , see Gruenhagen v. Larson , (stating that , generally, a court will not modify ordinary rules and procedures because a pro se party lacks the skills and knowledge of an attorney); (stating that “[a]lthough some accommodations may be m ade for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and m
Renee Vasko, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Estate of: Pauline Mary Serpico, Deceased. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Wayne P. Steffens, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(explaining that, while pro se litigants are afforded some accommodations, they are generally held to the same standards as attorneys).
, A18-1594 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this co urt has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.” Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules .”
In re the Marriage of: Diana Lynne Neumann, n/k/a Diana Lynne deVries, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
least, adequately communicating to the court what it is [she] wants accomplished and by whom.” Carpenter v. Woodvale, Inc. , (stating that generally, a court will not modify ordinary rules and procedures because a pro se party lacks the skills and knowledge of an attorney); (“A lthough some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”).
Clarence Johnson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
In re the Marriage of: David Michael Kedrowski, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. German 929 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. German 929 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , , 119 (Minn. App. 2001).
Jason McKenzie, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
7 “Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigan ts, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.” Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
Ripley Karen Bresson, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must compl y with court rules.”
Michael Noel, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
But pro se litigants “are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”
Wesley E. Wills, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Trust Created by Eileen Carlson Kasell, dated September 10, 2013, as amended. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Curtis McCoy, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
see also Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”).
Richard Willmar Rapatt, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Sharee Nolan, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re: Trust of Phyllis Gene Jones, Settlor Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Maria Olson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Said Ahmed Nur, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Red Cross Construction, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
Ashley Rae Crapser, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Estate of: Donald H. Richter, deceased Gerald Donald Richter, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Although appella nt is a pro se litigant, this court generally holds pro se litigants to the same standard as attorneys, and arguments unsupported by authorities or argument are “not [] considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection,” Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co., 290 Minn. 518, 519-20
Smeeta Antony, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Carpenter v. Woodvale, Inc., (stating that pro se litigants retain the burden of communicating the relief they are seeking to a court); Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald , (emphasizing that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys).
Barclays Bank Delaware, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”
Andrew James Gibbons, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[ A]lthough some accommodations 7 may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys.”
Charlotte Smith, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[P]ro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must 7 comply with cou rt rules.” Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald
In re the Marriage of: Elio Fumagalli, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Donny Warren, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally he ld to the same standa rds as attorneys.”
Eric D. Humphreys, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Although some accommodations may be made for pro se litigants, this court has repeatedly emphasized that pro se litigants are generally held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with court rules.”
Fulisha Fulmer, Relator v. Meridian Behavioral Health, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Fulisha Fulmer, Relator v. Meridian Behavioral Health, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Terry Torgerson, Relator v. Mark R. Hellerud, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Terry Torgerson, Relator v. Mark R. Hellerud, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 115, 119 (Minn. App. 2001).