Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Ver Kuilen v. Ver Kuilen, 578 N.W.2d 790.

24 citing documents.

County of Hennepin, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Ver Kuilen v. Ver Kuilen
In re the Marriage of: Abdiaziz Mohamud Elmi, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
at 708; d 790, 792 (Minn. App. 1998).
Paul Thomas Hesse, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Id.; (addressing an improper application of law).
A17-0997 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Ver Kuilen v. Ver Kuilen
In re the Marriage of: Jacqueline Lorraine Bourgoin v. Bradley Joseph Bourgoin, County of Anoka, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Jacqueline Lorraine Bourgoin v. Bradley Joseph Bourgoin, County of Anoka, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(addressing the setting of support in a manner that is against logic and facts on record); (addressing an improper application of law).
In re the Matter of: Juan Carlos Carreon v. Michelle Sorensen, Steele County, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Matter of: Juan Carlos Carreon v. Michelle Sorensen, Steele County, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Stacy Elizabeth Reeves v. Brian Lawrence Reeves, Hennepin County, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Stacy Elizabeth Reeves v. Brian Lawrence Reeves, Hennepin County, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ver Kuilen v. 4 Ver Kuilen, d 51, 53 (Minn. App. 1993), review denied (Minn. June 22, 1993).
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 814 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 814 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Gaming Enterprise v. Prescott 779 N.W.2d 320 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Gaming Enterprise v. Prescott 779 N.W.2d 320 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(stating that a district court abuses its discretion when it misapplies the applicable law).
Ramsey County v. Yee Lee 770 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Ramsey County v. Yee Lee 770 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Hubbard County Health & Human Services v. Zacher 742 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Hubbard County Health & Human Services v. Zacher 742 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
See Rutten, d at 50 (holding that the district court abuses its discretion when it sets support in a manner that is against logic and the facts in the record); (explaining that “[a]n abuse of discretion occurs when the [district court] improperly applies the law to the facts”).
Marriage of Schallinger v. Schallinger 699 N.W.2d 15 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Marriage of Schallinger v. Schallinger 699 N.W.2d 15 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
(against logic); (application of law).
Marriage of Eustathiades v. Bowman 695 N.W.2d 395 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Marriage of Eustathiades v. Bowman 695 N.W.2d 395 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
(setting support in a manner that is against logic and facts on the record); (improper application of the law).
County of Anoka Ex Rel. Hassan v. Roba 690 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
County of Anoka Ex Rel. Hassan v. Roba 690 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(stating that reviewing court will not reverse decision under Minn.Stat.