Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re the Welfare of C.M.G., 516 N.W.2d 555.

56 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Application of Anthony Allen Jessie Garnett for a Change of Name Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In re the Marriage of Zachary Dean Hollingsworth v. Anne Marie Halling Roe, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In re the Marriage of Zachary Dean Hollingsworth v. Anne Marie Halling Roe, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In the Matter of the Application of Marco Quinton Hanlon for a Change of Name. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
David Kaslow Swan v. Heidi Bloedel Moon Minn. Ct. App. 2023
David Kaslow Swan v. Heidi Bloedel Moon Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Matter of the Application of Luvenia Kollman for a Change of Name On Behalf of a … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Matter of: M. V. K., d/o/b July 12, 2017, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Application of Jose Luis Gutierrez for a change of legal name to Lazarus Twist. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In the Matter of the Application of Anthony Theodore Wagoner for a Change of Name. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Kevin James Stanton, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In the Matter of: E. D. M., petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
2 (providing that parentage presumptions can be rebutted); (stating that parentage presumptions are “not conclusive”).
In the Matter of the Application of Debora Lee Neu, Brian Joseph Neu for a Change of Name … Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In the Matter of the Application of: Hollis John Larson for a Change of Name. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Application of Russell Vincent Winbush for a Change of Name. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In Re the Custody of: N.S.V., L.J.V., E.T.V., Terri Ann Bischoff, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This court has described the goal of the presumptions of paternity as to “create a functional set of rules that point to a likely father.”
A. S. v. K. C.-W. (In re C. F. N.) 923 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A. S. v. K. C.-W. (In re C. F. N.) 923 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
561 (Minn. App. 1994) ; Kelly , d at 827 .
In the Matter of the Application of J. M. M. o/b/o Minors for a Change of Name Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Matter of: M. J. E. B. v. A. L. n/k/a A. T., E. G., C. … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Matter of: M. J. E. B. v. A. L. n/k/a A. T., E. G., C. … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ramsey County, Y. T. v. Guardian ad Litem, X. L., C. L., Ramsey County, M. Q. Y. v. … 853 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Ramsey County, Y. T. v. Guardian ad Litem, X. L., C. L., Ramsey County, M. Q. Y. v. … 853 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Appellate courts have recognized that presumptions “are not conclusive of paternity, but rather create a functional set of rules that point to a likely father.”
In the Matter of the Application of Arthur Senty-Haugen for a Name Change. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Application of Arthur Senty-Haugen for a Name Change. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
County of Dakota v. Blackwell 809 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
County of Dakota v. Blackwell 809 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Foster v. Foster 802 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
See Witso, d at 69 (stating that the district court would have to resolve competing presumptions before determining if one presumed father should have custodial or visitation rights); -61 (Minn.App.1994) (stating that district courts should determine which presumption “should lead to a declaration of paternity” by examining the facts of the case and considering the best interests of the child).
In Re the Trusteeship of the Trust Created Under Trust Agreement Dated December 31, 1974 674 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re the Trusteeship of the Trust Created Under Trust Agreement Dated December 31, 1974 674 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
“Whether the trial court properly interpreted the parentage act is a question of law, which we review without deference to the trial court’s conclusions.”
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(stating that "a child's best interests is a valid policy factor in resolving a conflict between competing paternity presumptions”); review denied (Minn. Sept.
LaChapelle v. Mitten 607 N.W.2d 151 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
LaChapelle v. Mitten 607 N.W.2d 151 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“When granting or denying a petition for a name change, the court must set forth clear and compelling reasons for its decision.”
Witso v. Overby 609 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Witso v. Overby 609 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“Whether the trial court properly interpreted the parentage act is a question of law, which we review without deference to the trial court’s conclusions.”
Losoya v. Richardson 584 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Losoya v. Richardson 584 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Interpretation of the Parentage Act is a legal question we review “without deference to the trial court’s conclusions.”
State v. Thomas 584 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Thomas 584 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Bunge v. Zachman 578 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Bunge v. Zachman 578 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(“[w]here competing presumptions of paternity exist, the determination of paternity is no longer solely an issue of biological fact”); see also Minn.Stat.
Murphy v. Myers 560 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Murphy v. Myers 560 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1997