Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Kornberg v. Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d 379.

95 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Brian Leon Boucher v. Xiuwen Li Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Brian Leon Boucher v. Xiuwen Li Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Heather Santilli Gamble v. John Stebbins Gamble Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Heather Santilli Gamble v. John Stebbins Gamble Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Dereje v. State 837 N.W.2d 714 Minn. 2013
In re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. 835 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
In re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. 835 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
This is because “an error in the standard of proof is only reversible error if it results in prejudice to the other party.” , 387 n. 3 (Minn.1996); see also T.E.S.
Alam v. Chowdhury 764 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Alam v. Chowdhury 764 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Butt v. Schmidt 747 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2008
Butt v. Schmidt 747 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2008
at 747 ; (stating that section 518.551, subd.
Marriage of Thompson v. Thompson 739 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Marriage of Thompson v. Thompson 739 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Modtland 695 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2005
State v. Modtland 695 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2005
(stating questions of law reviewed de novo).
Alpha Real Estate Co. of Rochester v. Delta Dental Plan of Minnesota 664 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2003
Alpha Real Estate Co. of Rochester v. Delta Dental Plan of Minnesota 664 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2003
Marriage of Huntsman v. Huntsman 633 N.W.2d 852 Minn. 2001
Marriage of Huntsman v. Huntsman 633 N.W.2d 852 Minn. 2001
Doering v. Doering 629 N.W.2d 124 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Doering v. Doering 629 N.W.2d 124 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Krech v. Krech 624 N.W.2d 310 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Krech v. Krech 624 N.W.2d 310 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Harding v. Harding 620 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Harding v. Harding 620 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
ANALYSIS The trial court’s decision refusing to reopen a judgment “will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.” (citations omitted).
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Welfare of G.L.H. 614 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2000
In Re the Welfare of G.L.H. 614 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2000
Statutory interpretation is a
Blanche v. 1995 Pontiac Grand Prix (VIN: 162WJ12M95F268403) 599 N.W.2d 161 Minn. 1999
Blanche v. 1995 Pontiac Grand Prix (VIN: 162WJ12M95F268403) 599 N.W.2d 161 Minn. 1999
Marriage of Hestekin v. Hestekin 587 N.W.2d 308 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Marriage of Hestekin v. Hestekin 587 N.W.2d 308 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Marriage of Dobrin v. Dobrin 569 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1997
Marriage of Dobrin v. Dobrin 569 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1997
Stelling v. Hanson Silo Co. 563 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Stelling v. Hanson Silo Co. 563 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Johnson v. Johnson 563 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Johnson v. Johnson 563 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
the supreme court explained that “other disability” includes a judge’s resignation or retirement.
State v. Camacho 561 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1997
State v. Camacho 561 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1997
(citation omitted); Frost-Benco Elec.
Walker v. Walker 553 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Walker v. Walker 553 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Zahavy v. University of Minnesota 544 N.W.2d 32 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Zahavy v. University of Minnesota 544 N.W.2d 32 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
387 n. 3 (Minn.1996) (concluding that application of wrong standard of proof was subject to harmless error standard of review).