Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Moylan v. Moylan, 384 N.W.2d 859.

390 citing documents.

Scearcy v. Mercado 410 N.W.2d 43 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Ensco International, Inc. v. Blegen 410 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Koury v. Koury 410 N.W.2d 31 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Scearcy v. Mercado 410 N.W.2d 43 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In “all child support cases not involving public assistance, the trial court must make specific findings of fact as to the factors it considered in formulating the award.”
Erickson v. Erickson 409 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Erickson v. Erickson 409 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Marx v. Marx 409 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Marx v. Marx 409 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
ANALYSIS I Modification of child support orders “lies in the broad and sound discretion of the trial court, and an appellate court will reverse for an abuse of that discretion only where it finds a ‘clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.’ ” ().
Marriage of Peterson v. Peterson 408 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Peterson v. Peterson 408 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Katz v. Katz 408 N.W.2d 835 Minn. 1987
Marriage of Katz v. Katz 408 N.W.2d 835 Minn. 1987
7 864 (Minn.1986), this court held that the Minn.Stat.
Marriage of Lenz v. Wergin 408 N.W.2d 873 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Lenz v. Wergin 408 N.W.2d 873 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Re the Marriage of Larson 408 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Re the Marriage of Larson 408 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Trial courts have broad discretion to modify child support payments, and “an appellate court will reverse for an abuse of that discretion only where it finds a ‘clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.’ ” ().
Marriage of Nies v. Nies 407 N.W.2d 484 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Nies v. Nies 407 N.W.2d 484 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
and find that the findings of the trial court are sufficient so as not to necessitate a remand.
Marriage of Stephens v. Stephens 407 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Stephens v. Stephens 407 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Novak v. Novak 406 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Bennyhoff v. Bennyhoff 406 N.W.2d 92 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Novak v. Novak 406 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
It is well established that the decision to modify a child support order lies in the broad and sound discretion of the trial court, and an appellate court will reverse for an abuse of discretion only where it finds a “clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.” ().
Marriage of Bennyhoff v. Bennyhoff 406 N.W.2d 92 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(“the welfare of the child takes precedence even if the case involves a stipulation”).
Mpls. Police Dept. v. Mpls. Civ. Rights Com'n 402 N.W.2d 125 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Mpls. Police Dept. v. Mpls. Civ. Rights Com'n 402 N.W.2d 125 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Sigurdson, decided three years later, clearly holds that express findings are now required
Marriage of Milke v. Mamer 405 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Smith v. Ocell 405 N.W.2d 532 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Lockhart v. Lockhart 405 N.W.2d 265 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Milke v. Mamer 405 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Smith v. Ocell 405 N.W.2d 532 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
5 are applicable to all child support cases and modification orders, -63 (Minn.1986), upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances.
Marriage of Lockhart v. Lockhart 405 N.W.2d 265 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
ANALYSIS Modification of child support orders “lies in the broad and sound discretion of the trial court, and an appellate court will reverse for an abuse of that discretion only where it finds a ‘clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.’ ” ().
Marriage of Kennedy v. Kennedy 403 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Quaid v. Quaid 403 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State, County of Clay Ex Rel. Hendrickson v. Hendrickson 403 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State, County of Clay Ex Rel. Hendrickson v. Hendrickson 403 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kennedy v. Kennedy 403 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(trial court’s discretion must be exercised within legislated limits); (trial court’s necessary powers in dissolution cases are limited by statutory standards and procedures).
Marriage of Quaid v. Quaid 403 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Stevens County Social Service Department Ex. Rel. Banken v. Banken 403 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
County of Ramsey v. Shir 403 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
County of Ramsey v. Shir 403 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
mandates that express findings of fact must be made in (1) all child support cases not involving public assistance and (2) public assistance cases in which the trial court departs from the child support guidelines.
Stevens County Social Service Department Ex. Rel. Banken v. Banken 403 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Jackson v. Jackson 403 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Heath v. Heath 402 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Heath v. Heath 402 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Jackson v. Jackson 403 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
It is well established that the decision to modify a child support order lies in the broad and sound discretion of the trial court, and an appellate court will reverse for an abuse of that discretion only where it finds a “clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.” ().
Marriage of Green v. Green 402 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Ricketson v. Ricketson 402 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Ricketson v. Ricketson 402 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
He claims the trial court’s
Marriage of Green v. Green 402 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987