Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kelly v. Cataldo, 488 N.W.2d 822.

27 citing documents.

In re the Matter of: M. V. K., d/o/b July 12, 2017, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
tter of law when it did “not discuss at all the strong preference in Minnesota law for blood relationships.” Peacock cites four cases to support his assertion that “[n]atural parents have an absolute right to a relationship with their children, absent ‘grave and weighty reasons.’” Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000); rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
A. S. v. K. C.-W. (In re C. F. N.) 923 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A. S. v. K. C.-W. (In re C. F. N.) 923 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Kelly v. Cataldo , , 827 (Minn. App. 1992), review denied (Minn. Sept.
In re the Matter of: M. J. E. B. v. A. L. n/k/a A. T., E. G., C. … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Matter of: M. J. E. B. v. A. L. n/k/a A. T., E. G., C. … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
B.J.H., d at 102–04; C.M.G., d at 560–61; review denied (Minn. Sept.
County of Dakota v. Blackwell 809 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
County of Dakota v. Blackwell 809 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
See, eg., ("Having regard for the statutory mandate of party status for the child, we can find no acceptable rationale for excluding the child from the process of addressing the difficult considerations on conflicting presumptions of fatherhood."), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
See, (remanding for joinder of a child where the child was a necessary party under Minn.Stat.
Dorman v. Steffen 666 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Dorman v. Steffen 666 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
B.J.H., d at 102-03 (rejecting argument that “stability” should be favored over other considerations); (discussing many considerations involved in determining paternity), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(stating that "a child's best interests is a valid policy factor in resolving a conflict between competing paternity presumptions”); review denied (Minn. Sept.
Mower County Human Services Ex Rel. Garcia v. Graves 611 N.W.2d 386 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Mower County Human Services Ex Rel. Garcia v. Graves 611 N.W.2d 386 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
See, e.g., R.B., d at 636 ; -27 (Minn.App.1992), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Witso v. Overby 609 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Witso v. Overby 609 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
review denied (Minn. Sept.
State v. Thomas 584 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Thomas 584 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
review denied (Minn. Sept.
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See C.M.G., d at 560 (stating "a child's best interests is a valid policy factor in resolving a conflict between competing paternity presumptions") (emphasis added); (noting Minn.Stat.
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See C.M.G., d at 560 (stating “a child’s best interests is a valid policy factor in resolving a conflict between competing paternity presumptions”) (emphasis added); (noting Minn.Stat.
DeGrande v. Demby 529 N.W.2d 340 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
DeGrande v. Demby 529 N.W.2d 340 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
16, 1993); (child's best interest used to resolve conflicting paternity presumptions); (same), pet.
In Re the Welfare of C.M.G. 516 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
In Re the Welfare of C.M.G. 516 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
824 n. 3 (Minn.App.1992) (genetic test evidence of one man’s paternity establishes conflicting presumption in his favor rather than rebutting existing presumption in favor of another man), pet.