Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Pikula v. Pikula, 374 N.W.2d 705.

416 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Timothy Michael Kopp v. Christina Ann Burton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Timothy Michael Kopp v. Christina Ann Burton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Emily-Jean Chinwendu Aguocha v. Ikechukwu Hisa Aguocha Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Emily-Jean Chinwendu Aguocha v. Ikechukwu Hisa Aguocha Minn. Ct. App. 2016
4 improperly applying the law.”
In re the Marriage of: David Allen Anderson v. Lisa Marie Anderson n/k/a Lisa Marie Syverson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: David Allen Anderson v. Lisa Marie Anderson n/k/a Lisa Marie Syverson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
J. T. S. v. S. L. v. B. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
J. T. S. v. S. L. v. B. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
In re the Marriage of: Todd Emil Nelson v. Leslie Ann Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Denise Kaye Newman v. Thomas Joseph Newman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Todd Emil Nelson v. Leslie Ann Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Denise Kaye Newman v. Thomas Joseph Newman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
In Re the Custody of: A. J. O. David Ortiz v. Sarah Judith Un Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In Re the Custody of: A. J. O. David Ortiz v. Sarah Judith Un Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christina Marie Rexine v. Joey Lee Rexine Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christina Marie Rexine v. Joey Lee Rexine Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Jaime Dawn Starren v. Jason Charles Starren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christophe Traore Dit Labarere v. Fatima Lakehal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christophe Traore Dit Labarere v. Fatima Lakehal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Sheikh Bilaal Muhammad Arafat f/k/a Mark Edward Wetsch v. Barlin Mohamed Ahmed Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Sheikh Bilaal Muhammad Arafat f/k/a Mark Edward Wetsch v. Barlin Mohamed Ahmed Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Anthony Linus Orner v. Shauna Orner Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Anthony Linus Orner v. Shauna Orner Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The guiding principle in all custody cases is the best interest of the child.”
In the Matter of the Child of: C. A. L. and R. C. R., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Child of: C. A. L. and R. C. R., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that a district court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error).
DuPrece Lashae Slaughter v. Anissa Lachelle Black, Lisa Danielle Willis Minn. Ct. App. 2014
DuPrece Lashae Slaughter v. Anissa Lachelle Black, Lisa Danielle Willis Minn. Ct. App. 2014
A district court abuses its discretion “by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.” Pikula 4 v. Pikula
In re the Marriage of: Peiliang Yuan v. Te Hao, and In re the Matter of: Te Hao … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Peiliang Yuan v. Te Hao, and In re the Matter of: Te Hao … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
In re the Marriage of: Anne Elizabeth Castle-Heaney v. Bruce Edward Heaney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Anne Elizabeth Castle-Heaney v. Bruce Edward Heaney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Jeffrey Philip Dawson v. Sara Rhea Taylor, County of Dakota, Intervenor. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Jeffrey Philip Dawson v. Sara Rhea Taylor, County of Dakota, Intervenor. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“A district court abuses [its] discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or improperly applying the law.” ().
In re the Matter of: Ronald Lee Kish v. Kimberly Sue Wirth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Jonathan Conneely v. Hannah Stancek, f/k/a Hannah Conneely Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Matter of: Ronald Lee Kish v. Kimberly Sue Wirth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
In re the Marriage of: Jonathan Conneely v. Hannah Stancek, f/k/a Hannah Conneely Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Ramirez v. Luna 830 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Ramirez v. Luna 830 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
A district court abuses “its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Marriage of Kremer v. Kremer 827 N.W.2d 454 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Marriage of Kremer v. Kremer 827 N.W.2d 454 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Pollard v. Crowghost 794 N.W.2d 373 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Pollard v. Crowghost 794 N.W.2d 373 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
“Appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the [district] court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Citizens State Bank v. Raven Trading Partners, Inc. 786 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 2010
Hagen v. Schirmers 783 N.W.2d 212 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Hagen v. Schirmers 783 N.W.2d 212 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
In Re the Marriage of Rose v. Rose 765 N.W.2d 142 Minn. Ct. App. 2009