Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Desrosier v. Desrosier, 551 N.W.2d 507.

25 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In Desrosier v. Desrosier, this court determined that a parent’s annual bonus payments were “a dependable form of periodic payment” under the child-support statute, even though the payments were “not guaranteed and uncertain as to amount.”
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
d 507, 510 (Minn. App. 1996).
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Because a [district] court has broa d discretion in dividing property , its [valuation date] decision will stand unless it has abused that discretion.”
In re the Marriage of: Any K. Arensberg v. Nicholas Shamus Arensberg Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Any K. Arensberg v. Nicholas Shamus Arensberg Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[T]he public policy giving children the right to enjoy the benefit of their parents’ increased income is paramount.”
In re the Marriage of: Kelly Susan LaPara, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
As another example, t his court has affirmed in numerous cases that annual bonuses can be periodic payments, even though the bonuses were “not guaranteed and [were] uncertain as to amount,” as long as the record supported the determination that the bonuses were paid more or less on a regular basis.3 d 507, 509 (Minn. App. 1996); see also Novak v. Novak , rev. denied (Minn. July 22, 1987) .
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Minn. Stat. § 518A.29(a) (2018)
In re the Marriage of: Kimberly JoAnn Wauzynski, n/k/a/ Kimberly JoAnn Denne, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Bonuses may be included in an obligor’s income for spousal maintenance purposes when they are regularly received or when they are a dependable form of periodic payment, are expected to continue, and constitute a high percentage of the obligor’s annual inco me. See Derosier v. Derosier
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Bonuses may be part of a party’s income, even if th ey are “not guaranteed and uncertain as to amount,” provided that they are “a depe ndable form of periodic payment.”
In re the Marriage of: Jill Melisa Sinda, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 253, 261 (Minn. App. 1986) (concluding annual bonuses ranging from $0 to $9,000 did not constitute income); Desrosier v. Desrosier , -09 (Minn. App. 1996) (concluding annual bonuses ranging from $7,000 to $17,000 constituted income).
In re the Marriage of: Nathan Winesett, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(conclud ing irregular annual bonuses ranging from $0 to $9,000 did not constitute income); -09 (Minn. App. 1996) (concluding annual bonuses ranging from $7,000 to $17,000 constituted income).
In re the Marriage of: Michael Dennis Dewar, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In the Matter of: Tamara Lynn Kriesel, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
-09 (Minn. App. 1996) (concluding annual bonuses ranging from $7,000 to $17,000 constituted income).
In re the Marriage of: Dodamwalage Dinesh Jayawardena, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Nelson, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Katherina Theresa Bernhagen v. Peter John Bernhagen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Katherina Theresa Bernhagen v. Peter John Bernhagen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Alam v. Chowdhury 764 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Alam v. Chowdhury 764 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
(using date of separation as.
Grigsby v. Grigsby 648 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Grigsby v. Grigsby 648 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Marriage of Svenningsen v. Svenningsen 641 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Marriage of Svenningsen v. Svenningsen 641 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
§ 518.17 to insure support for children during minority); (recognizing public policy favors setting child support at specific amount).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by