Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Wibbens v. Wibbens, 379 N.W.2d 225.

79 citing documents.

In Re the Custody of L.B.O.; Bibi Whited v. Kenzie Quinn, Tyler Ohman, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
P. 61 (requiring district courts to disregard errors that do not affect the parties’ substantial rights); (stating that “error is never presumed” and the appellant must affirmatively show that the district court erred); (refusing to remand for a de minimis, technical error).
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
( (stating that de minimis error in setting child support is not grounds for remand)).
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(refusing to remand for a de minimis, technical error with approximately $120 at stake); Minn. R. Civ.
Craig Stevenson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(refusing to remand for de minimis error).
In re the Marriage of: Erica Hopper McMullen, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Christine Stelben Connolly, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(denying appellate relief for de minimis error).
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: B. H. and D. H., Commissioner of Human … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(refusing to remand for de minimis error).
In re the Marriage of: John Alex Walker, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In re the Marriage of: Jennifer Kristin Gorney, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(refusing to remand for de minimis technical error).
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Leigh Brinkman, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See Wibbens v. Wibbens , (refusing to remand for a de minimis error in child support); Risk ex rel.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(stating that a district court’s decision will not be reversed if it reaches the right result for the wrong reason); (refu sing to remand for a de minimis, technical error).
Adam C. Steele, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Wibbens v. Wibbens , ( declining to remand for a de minimis, technical error).
In re the Estate of: Irene B. Horton, Deceased. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Wibbens v. Wibbens , (declining to remand for de minimis technical error).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
n.1 (Minn. App. 2010) (citing Wibbens v. Wibbens , ) (holding that the district c ourt’s failure to account for what amounted to be approximately 0.5% of the total marital property was de minimis), review denied (Minn. Nov.
Jason Rhoades, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(declining to remand for de minimis technical error).
In re the Marriage of: Jesse A. Freking, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
16, 2010) ; see also Hesse v. Hesse , (concluding de minimis change in expenses did not warrant a parenting-time-expense adjustment of child support) ; (refusing to remand for de minis error in child-support calculation).
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Hertz, 304 Minn. at 145, d at 44 ; cf. Wibbens v. Wibbens , (refusing to remand for de minimis error).
In re the Matter of: Colleen Jea’ne Olson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
d 225, 227 (Minn. App. 1985) (holding that a technic al error that would provide party with additional $120 was de minimus and did not require remand).
In re the Marriage of: Sandra Kay Vogt, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(declining to remand for technical, de minimis error); see also Prahl, d at 702 (“Because the district court, as the factfinder, is charged with reconciling conflicting evidence, the fact that the record might support findings other than those made by the district court does not sho
In re the Matter of: Peter H. Stier, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See, e.g., Hesse, d at 105; d 839, 843 (Minn. App. 2001) ; Wibbens v. Wibbens , see also Risk ex rel.
County of Ramsey, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
P. 61 (harmless error); (de minimis error).
In re the Marriage of: Tracy Wong Belcher, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 225, 227 (Minn. App. 1985) (declining to remand based on technical error because the effect on the case was de minimis).
In re: The Dale A. Johnson Trust Under Agreement Dated August 10, 2006 as Amended and Restated on … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
7 (Minn. App. 1985) (refusing to remand for a de minimis, technical error).
In the Matter of the Petition of CitiMortgage, Inc., a New York corporation, relating to Certificate of Title … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that de minimis error not grounds for reversal).
In re the Marriage of: David Joseph Williams, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(declining to remand for technical error).
In Re the Custody of N.O.K. Jason Michael Krause v. Marissa Lauren Gomez Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In Re the Custody of N.O.K. Jason Michael Krause v. Marissa Lauren Gomez Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See, (declining to remand a district court’s child-support order based on a de minimis error).
In re the Marriage of: Lana Michelle Kerola v. Greg William Kerola Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Loth v. Loth, 227 Minn. 387, 392, (declining to remand for de minimis error).
Melissa Dawn Paisley v. Clark Davis Kratzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Melissa Dawn Paisley v. Clark Davis Kratzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
P. 61 (requiring harmless error to be ignored); (stating that “[a]lthough error may exist, unless the error is prejudicial, no grounds exist for reversal”); (stating that a district court will not be reversed if it reached an affirmable result for the wrong reason); (refusing to remand for de minimis, technical error).
State of Minnesota v. Jose C. Garcia Delaharran, Griffin Bail Bonds, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jose C. Garcia Delaharran, Griffin Bail Bonds, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(declining to remand for de minimis technical error).
In re the Marriage of: Kumiko Olivia Highley v. Christopher Alan Kvaal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Kumiko Olivia Highley v. Christopher Alan Kvaal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(declining to remand for de minimis error).
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
16, 2010); (declining to remand to correct “technical error”).
In re the Marriage of: James Donald Knight v. Maria Pieternella Knight Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: James Donald Knight v. Maria Pieternella Knight Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(declining to remand and affirming the district court when the district court would undoubtedly reach the same result on remand); (refusing to remand for technical, de minimis financial error).
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn R. Rauworth, n/k/a Kathryn R. Kendall v. Barry L. Rauworth Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Kathryn R. Rauworth, n/k/a Kathryn R. Kendall v. Barry L. Rauworth Minn. Ct. App. 2015
16, 2010); (declining to remand for district court error in calculating child support to account for a cost-of-living increase worth $120).
Timothy E. Lewis v. Paul J. Borchert Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Timothy E. Lewis v. Paul J. Borchert Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(declining to remand for a de minimis technical error); (declining to remand and ordering a reduction in damages consistent with the district court’s attempted reduction after appeal had been taken and “taking cognizance of [the
Jeffrey Philip Dawson v. Sara Rhea Taylor, County of Dakota, Intervenor. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Jeffrey Philip Dawson v. Sara Rhea Taylor, County of Dakota, Intervenor. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(declining to remand for an actual but de minimus error in child support).
RISK EX REL. MILLER v. Stark 787 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
RISK EX REL. MILLER v. Stark 787 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(refusing to remand for a de minimis error).
Riverview Muir Doran, LLC v. JADT Development Group, LLC 776 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Riverview Muir Doran, LLC v. JADT Development Group, LLC 776 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
(refusing to remand for de minimis error).
Marriage of Hesse v. Hesse 778 N.W.2d 98 Minn. Ct. App. 2009