Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite County of Nicollet v. Larson, 421 N.W.2d 717.

28 citing documents.

Putz v. Putz 645 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 2002
Putz v. Putz 645 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 2002
However, we stated: There can be no doubt that ‘the primary obligation of support of a child should fall on the parent and the County should only be expected to contribute to the extent that the parent is unable.’ There can be no other rule since the parent has the primary responsibility to support the child.
Marriage of Davis v. Davis 631 N.W.2d 822 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Davis v. Davis 631 N.W.2d 822 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(holding court must consider obligor’s ability to pay and amount of assistance expended by the county in calculating reimbursement owed).
Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Marriage of Murphy v. Murphy 574 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(noting strong state policy of assuring children have adequate and timely economic support from their parents); (concluding only when parent does not provide for child should government step in); Tammen v. Tammen, 289 Minn. 28, 30 , (concluding minor children have basic right to support *82 from their parents and that in matters of support, paramount concern is welfare of children).
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ON BEHALF OF CLARK v. Hernandez 554 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ON BEHALF OF CLARK v. Hernandez 554 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
interpreting its holding to limit judicial authority in reviewing reimbursement claims under Minn.Stat.
Marriage of Bartl v. Bartl 497 N.W.2d 295 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Marriage of Bartl v. Bartl 497 N.W.2d 295 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Becker County Human Services v. Peppel 493 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Becker County Human Services v. Peppel 493 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Marriage of Schneider v. Schneider 473 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Otto v. Otto 472 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Otto v. Otto 472 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Marriage of Schneider v. Schneider 473 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
(reimbursement of county for past public assistance payments to support child is based on an ability to pay standard).
Anderson v. Anderson 470 N.W.2d 719 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Anderson v. Anderson 470 N.W.2d 719 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
County of Pine v. Petersen 453 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
County of Pine v. Petersen 453 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Based on amendments of the provision through 1986, it was determined by the supreme court that future awards be decided “with an eye toward the guidelines.”
Marriage of Herrley v. Herrley 452 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Marriage of Herrley v. Herrley 452 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
County of Crow Wing Ex Rel. Crow Wing County Social Services v. Thoe 451 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
County of Crow Wing Ex Rel. Crow Wing County Social Services v. Thoe 451 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
County of Hennepin v. Boyle 450 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
County of Hennepin v. Boyle 450 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State Ex Rel. Miller v. Miller 446 N.W.2d 199 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State Ex Rel. Miller v. Miller 446 N.W.2d 199 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
*201 see also County of Anoka, d at 267 .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by