Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Balogh v. Balogh, 356 N.W.2d 307.

23 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Pamela Jo Pemberton, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 307, 310 (Minn. App. 1984) (stating “the market valuation determined by the trier of fact should be sustained if it falls within the limits of credible estimates made by competent witnesses” (quotation omitted)).
In re the Marriage of: Michael Dennis Dewar, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Ronnkvist v. Ronnkvist , (noting that a district court’s valuation of an asset “should be supported by either clear documentary or testi monial evidence or by comprehensive findings”); (determining that valuation award was arbitrary where district court failed to make factual findings demonstrating how it arrived at a value between two valuation figures).
Distinguished In the Marriage of: Debra Lynn Ober, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In support of his position that this court must remand for more specific findings on his prospective claims, h usband cites Rogers v. Rogers , d 307 (Minn. App. 1984) , review denied (Minn. Jan.
Marriage of Worden v. Worden 403 N.W.2d 909 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Worden v. Worden 403 N.W.2d 909 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
in which this court found a trial court’s averaging approach to be unfair when there was a great disparity in figures submitted by two opposing experts.
Marriage of Flynn v. Flynn 402 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Flynn v. Flynn 402 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Bateman v. Bateman 382 N.W.2d 240 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Bateman v. Bateman 382 N.W.2d 240 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Balogh v. Balogh 376 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Balogh v. Balogh 376 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
That judgment and decree was amended by the trial court pursuant to directions by this court on remand from the first appeal
Marriage of Nemitz v. Nemitz 376 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Nemitz v. Nemitz 376 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
where the disparity between two appraisals (of $1,640 and $90,000) was substantial and there was nothing in the court record to explain the court’s selection of a halfway figure ($45,-000).
Marriage of Brockman v. Brockman 373 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Brockman v. Brockman 373 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Redding v. Redding 372 N.W.2d 31 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Redding v. Redding 372 N.W.2d 31 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Kostelnik v. Kostelnik 367 N.W.2d 665 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Kostelnik v. Kostelnik 367 N.W.2d 665 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
“The trial court’s method of valuation ‘is to be affirmed if it has an acceptable basis in fact and principle even though this court may have taken a different approach.’ ” (quoting Castonguay v. *670 Castonguay
Marriage of Hein v. Hein 366 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Hein v. Hein 366 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Novick v. Novick 366 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Novick v. Novick 366 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
“Where tax consequences are not speculative or conjectural, a trial court has the discretion to consider them in making a property division and its decision should not be overruled, absent abuse.”