Cited by

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

417 citing documents.

Marriage of Goose v. Goose 406 N.W.2d 4 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The trial court agreed that it would be in Garrick’s best interests to grant custody to appellant, to grant custody to respondent: If the court were permitted to use the best interest of the child test and Minn. Stat. § 518.17 , [subd.
Bettin v. Bettin 404 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Bettin v. Bettin 404 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kennedy v. Kennedy 403 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Tollefson v. Tollefson 403 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Tollefson v. Tollefson 403 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kennedy v. Kennedy 403 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In November 1985, this court reviewed the 1984 custody decision, (initially filed in September 1985).
Marriage of Sheeran v. Sheeran 401 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Stenzel v. Stenzel 401 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Sheeran v. Sheeran 401 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Stenzel v. Stenzel 401 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
ANALYSIS In reviewing custody awards this court is limited to determining “whether the trial court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Marriage of Gillis v. Gillis 400 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Gillis v. Gillis 400 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
the supreme court held that those factors require that when both parents seek custody of a child too young to express a preference for a particular parent and one parent has been the primary caretaker, custody be awarded to the primary parent absent a showing that that parent is unfit to be the custodian.
Marriage of Moir v. Moir 400 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kerkhoff v. Kerkhoff 400 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Psyck v. Wojtysiak 400 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Tanghe v. Tanghe 400 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Tanghe v. Tanghe 400 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Kerkhoff v. Kerkhoff 400 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
She claims that she was the primary caretaker prior to the parties’ separation, and therefore the trial court should have awarded her custody of the children, absent a finding that she was unfit
Marriage of Moir v. Moir 400 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Psyck v. Wojtysiak 400 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Re the Custody of N.M.O. 399 N.W.2d 700 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Re the Custody of N.M.O. 399 N.W.2d 700 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Leyh v. Stelzer 398 N.W.2d 63 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Leyh v. Stelzer 398 N.W.2d 63 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Rosen v. Rosen 398 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Rosen v. Rosen 398 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
came out shortly after trial, and was cited to the court in Linda’s trial memorandum and post-trial motion.
Marriage of Whitmore v. Fischer 397 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Andros v. Andros 396 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Whitmore v. Fischer 397 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Andros v. Andros 396 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Surrett v. Surrett 396 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Surrett v. Surrett 396 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Haasken v. Haasken 396 N.W.2d 253 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Haasken v. Haasken 396 N.W.2d 253 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
when a child is “too young to express a preference for a particular parent and one parent has been the primary caretaker, custody [is] awarded to the primary caretaker absent a showing that that parent is unfit to be the custodian.” Id.
Marriage of Clark v. Bullard 396 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Greenlaw v. Greenlaw 396 N.W.2d 68 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Schwamb v. Schwamb 395 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Clark v. Bullard 396 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Schwamb v. Schwamb 395 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
ANALYSIS This court’s review of a trial court’s custody determination is limited to ascertaining “whether the trial court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Marriage of Greenlaw v. Greenlaw 396 N.W.2d 68 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Rimer v. Rimer 395 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Regenscheid v. Regenscheid 395 N.W.2d 375 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Rimer v. Rimer 395 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
DISCUSSION Appellate review of a custody determination is “limited to whether the trial court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Marriage of Regenscheid v. Regenscheid 395 N.W.2d 375 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Tasker v. Tasker 395 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Uhl v. Uhl 395 N.W.2d 106 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Uhl v. Uhl 395 N.W.2d 106 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
ANALYSIS On appeal, this court’s review of custody determinations “is limited to whether the trial court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.”
Marriage of Tasker v. Tasker 395 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Tubwon v. Weisberg 394 N.W.2d 601 Minn. Ct. App. 1986