Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re the Welfare of D.L., 486 N.W.2d 375.

48 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: V. R. R. and M. A. H., Parents, … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: V. R. R. and M. A. H., Parents, … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Compare S.G., d at 126 (affirming denial of grandparents’ motion for adoptive placement where district court found “there is a real risk of future emotional and developmental damage if the children are removed from the foster parents’ home” (quotation omitted)); with -78 (Minn. 1992) (affirming grant of grandparents’ adoption petition where district court found, based on 13 credible expert testimony, that the trauma associated with breaking the child’s bond with their foster parents “would be te
Minn. 2022
LuAnn Carol Stanius, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(stating that disqualifying bias or prejudice “must stem from an extrajudicial source and result in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from her participation in the case.”) , aff’d
In re the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A. R. H., R. W. G., and … Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: N. A. L. and D. E. S., … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re the Marriage of: Reno L. Brandt v. Jessie J. Johnson, f/k/a Jessie J. Brandt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Reno L. Brandt v. Jessie J. Johnson, f/k/a Jessie J. Brandt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Disqualifying bias or prejudice “must stem from an extrajudicial source and result in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from her participation in the case.” d 408, 415 (Minn. App. 1991), aff’d
In Re GUARDIANSHIP OF Jose Maria Chimborazo GUAMAN 879 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In Re GUARDIANSHIP OF Jose Maria Chimborazo GUAMAN 879 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
P. 63.03; (noting that disqualifying bias or prejudice “must stem from an extrajudicial source and result in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from her participation in the case”), aff’d
In re S.G. 828 N.W.2d 118 Minn. 2013
Look Ex Rel. Dehen v. Pact Charter School 763 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Look Ex Rel. Dehen v. Pact Charter School 763 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
The department’s opinion contradicts the language adopted by the legislature, which evidences intent for the preference to apply in “towns.” Further, “[i]t is well established that a lone legislator is not competent to testify about the intent of a statute, even if she or he authored it.”
In re K.L.B. 759 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
In Re Klb 759 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
In Re Klb 759 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
In re K.L.B. 759 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Walker v. Zuehlke 642 N.W.2d 745 Minn. 2002
Walker v. Zuehlke 642 N.W.2d 745 Minn. 2002
Scott v. Minneapolis Police Relief Ass’n, 615 NW.2d 66, 73 (Minn.2000)
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
(stating that “the trial *764 court retains broad discretion because of its opportunity to observe the parties and hear the witnesses”).
In Re Santoro 594 N.W.2d 174 Minn. 1999
In Re the Adoption of C.H. 554 N.W.2d 737 Minn. 1996
In Re the Adoption of C.H. 554 N.W.2d 737 Minn. 1996
Domtar, Inc. v. Niagara Fire Insurance Co. 552 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Domtar, Inc. v. Niagara Fire Insurance Co. 552 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(concluding that although testimony was inadmissible, claim of error was moot because subject of testimony was not employed for court’s decision); see 11 Peter N. Thompson, Minnesota Practice § 704.01 (1992) (stating that if the foundation for the expert’s testimony is fully developed, “there may be l
In Re the Adoption of C.H. 548 N.W.2d 292 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In Re the Adoption of C.H. 548 N.W.2d 292 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Roatch v. Puera 534 N.W.2d 560 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Roatch v. Puera 534 N.W.2d 560 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
See Minn.Code Jud.Conduct Canon 3C(l)(a) (judge should disqualify himself when impartiality might be questioned for personal prejudice or bias against a party); (judge may not preside at trial if he has an interest in the outcome or if he could be excluded as a juror for bias), cert.
Olson v. Olson 534 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1995
Olson v. Olson 534 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1995
In re Adopt K.L.L. 515 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Matter of KLL 515 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
In re Adopt K.L.L. 515 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(initial pain to child of separation from foster parents is “not good cause to defeat the family preference”), cert.
Matter of KLL 515 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(initial pain to child of separation from foster parents is "not good cause to defeat the family preference"), cert.
In Re ST 512 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1994
In re Petition to Adopt S.T. 512 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1994
In re Petition to Adopt S.T. 512 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1994
In Re ST 512 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1994
Weiler v. Lutz 501 N.W.2d 667 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Weiler v. Lutz 501 N.W.2d 667 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
See, (statutes and common law both accord custodial preference to near relatives), cert.
In Re ST 497 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In Re ST 497 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In re Adopt S.T. 497 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In re Adopt S.T. 497 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Kelly v. Cataldo 488 N.W.2d 822 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Kelly v. Cataldo 488 N.W.2d 822 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
664, 665 (1914) (natural parent’s rights of custody and control a "paramount" consideration); (employing preference for blood relatives); see also Spaeth, d at 322 (overriding purpose of parentage proceedings to determine biological parenthood).