Cited by

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

79 citing documents.

Marriage of Hesse v. Hesse 778 N.W.2d 98 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
(refusing to remand for de minimis error in setting child support).
Moore v. Moore 734 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Moore v. Moore 734 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Thereafter neither of the parties shall be entitled to alimony then or in the future ” (emphasis added in Loo)); (stating that motion to extend temporary maintenance was made “two days before the expiration of [the] maintenance obligation”); -27 (Minn. App.1985) (refusing, on appeal from dissolution judgment awarding temporary maintenance, to address whether district court abused its discretion by not reserving authority over maintenance, noting that “[s]ince the trial court here awarded tempora
Scott v. Forest Lake Chrysler-Plymouth Dodge 637 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Scott v. Forest Lake Chrysler-Plymouth Dodge 637 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(refusing *597 to remand for de minimis technical error); see also Minn. R. Civ.
Marriage of Duffney v. Duffney 625 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Duffney v. Duffney 625 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(refusing to remand for de minimis technical error); see also Minn. R.Civ.P.
Bunge v. Zachman 578 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Bunge v. Zachman 578 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(holding that a technical error that would provide party with additional $120 was de minimus and did not require remand).
Mower County Human Services Ex Rel. Meyer v. Hueman 543 N.W.2d 682 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Mower County Human Services Ex Rel. Meyer v. Hueman 543 N.W.2d 682 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
1 (1994); (statutory requirement is mandatory).
In Re the Welfare of S.R.A. 527 N.W.2d 835 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
In Re the Welfare of S.R.A. 527 N.W.2d 835 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Berens v. Berens 443 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Berens v. Berens 443 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McCarthy v. McCarthy, 293 Minn. 61, 66 , Warner v. Warner, 219 Minn. 59, 68-69
Marriage of Karon v. Karon 435 N.W.2d 501 Minn. 1989
Marriage of Karon v. Karon 435 N.W.2d 501 Minn. 1989
McCarthy v. McCarthy, 293 Minn. 61, 66 , Warner v. Warner, 219 Minn. 59, 68-69
Marriage of Driscoll v. Driscoll 414 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Driscoll v. Driscoll 414 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Cisek v. Cisek 409 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Cisek v. Cisek 409 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(review of duration of a temporary maintenance award would be premature where it was not clear whether the spouse receiving maintenance would become self sufficient before maintenance was due to terminate); (trial court was not required to reserve the issue of maintenance after expiration of temporary maintenance; appellant could move to reserve maintenance at the time jurisdictional problems would arise, before the maintenance obligation would cease).
Marriage of Poach v. Poach 392 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Poach v. Poach 392 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Nardini v. Nardini 385 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Nardini v. Nardini 385 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Catania v. Catania 385 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Catania v. Catania 385 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
: Since the trial court here awarded temporary maintenance, no reservation of the issue was required.
Marriage of Griepp v. Griepp 381 N.W.2d 865 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Griepp v. Griepp 381 N.W.2d 865 Minn. Ct. App. 1986