Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of McCulloch v. McCulloch, 435 N.W.2d 564.

25 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Clark Donald Kaml, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Marriage of: Rupam Sinha, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(recognizing that findings of fact underlying a spousal-mainten ance decision “must be upheld unless clearly erroneous” (quotation omitted)).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
McCulloch v. McCulloch , ().
In re the Marriage of: Donald William McIsaac, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
9 -68 (Minn. App. 1989) ( affirming district court’s decision not to include 50% of future bonus compensation as spousal maintenance); Doherty v. Doherty , n.1 (Minn. App. 1986) (affirming award of spousal maintenance, but discouraging ongoing maintenance awards that include a base amount plus
In re the Marriage of: Beth Ann Bersaw, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Muschik v. Conner-Muschik 920 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Muschik v. Conner-Muschik 920 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
McCulloch v. McCulloch , , 568 (Minn. App. 1989) (quotation omitted).
In re the Marriage of: Elena Vladimirovna Tokarev v. Vladimir Efimovich Tokarev Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Marriage of: Elena Vladimirovna Tokarev v. Vladimir Efimovich Tokarev Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Expense Calculation The district court’s calculation of a party’s reasonable expenses “must be upheld unless clearly erroneous.”
In re the Marriage of: William David Wilder v. Michelle R. Wilder Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: William David Wilder v. Michelle R. Wilder Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(“Generally, if a payment is periodic, it is income.”); (noting that dependable sources of income may properly be included in an income calculation).
In re the Marriage of: James Walter Shaw v. Barbara Ann Shaw Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: James Walter Shaw v. Barbara Ann Shaw Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Factual findings regarding monthly expenses in a spousal-maintenance calculation “must be upheld unless clearly erroneous.”
In re the Marriage of: Kerry S. Spolum v. Michael J. D'Amato Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Kerry S. Spolum v. Michael J. D'Amato Minn. Ct. App. 2015
While factual findings regarding monthly expenses in a spousal-maintenance calculation “must be upheld unless clearly erroneous,” “[a] [district] court’s calculation of living expenses must be supported by the evidence.”
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Alice Gribble v. William Daniel Gribble Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Alice Gribble v. William Daniel Gribble Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But factual findings regarding monthly expenses in a spousal- maintenance calculation “must be upheld unless clearly erroneous.”
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Ross Wickenhauser v. Denise Esther Wickenhauser, n/k/a Denise Esther Peterson, (A14-0417), and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Gregory Ross Wickenhauser v. Denise Esther Wickenhauser, n/k/a Denise Esther Peterson, (A14-0417), and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that “merely transferring 8 title from individual ownership to joint tenancy does not transform non-marital property into marital property” (quotation omitted)).
In re the Marriage of: Pamela Kay Beltrand v. Thomas Leo Beltrand Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Pamela Kay Beltrand v. Thomas Leo Beltrand Minn. Ct. App. 2014
maintenance is inequitable because his net monthly W-2 income, as found by the court, is $5,868.64, leaving him without enough money to pay his monthly bills and unable to “buy anything, even groceries, because [he does] not know when the next distribution check is coming so that [he has] money in the bank.” The district court rejected Thomas’s arguments, for the proposition that public policy disfavors Thomas’s “proposed ‘base-plus-a-percent’ approach.” And the district court stated that Husban
Marriage of Chamberlain v. Chamberlain 615 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Marriage of Chamberlain v. Chamberlain 615 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Marriage of Pfleiderer v. Pfleiderer 591 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Marriage of Pfleiderer v. Pfleiderer 591 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
The mere act of “‘transferring title from individual ownership to joint tenancy does not transform non-marital property into marital property.’ ” ().