Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite LeTendre v. LeTendre, 388 N.W.2d 412.

34 citing documents.

Marriage of Hunley v. Hunley 757 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Marriage of Hunley v. Hunley 757 N.W.2d 898 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Marriage of Kielley v. Kielley 674 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Marriage of Kielley v. Kielley 674 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(stating “[p]arties cannot enter into a stipulation which might not be in the best interests of the child”); (noting “nonbargainable” nature of child’s interest in support and that support is “less subject to restraint by stipulation” than other dissolution questions).
Marriage of Fulmer v. Fulmer 594 N.W.2d 210 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Marriage of Fulmer v. Fulmer 594 N.W.2d 210 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Beede, d at 835 ; (stating “opportunity for a self-employed person to support himself yet report a negligible net income is too well known to require exposition”).
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) (trial court “may” waive COLA requirement); (waiver of COLA is discretionary).
Marriage of Braatz v. Braatz 489 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Marriage of Braatz v. Braatz 489 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(trial court not required to issue findings where it declines to exercise its discretion to grant a waiver of the cost-of-living adjustment).
County of Dakota v. Hendrickson 482 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
County of Dakota v. Hendrickson 482 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
See Johnson, d at 875-76 ; (“child support requirements relate to nonbargainable interests of the children” and are “less subject to restraint by stipulation” than are other elements of dissolution settlement).
Beltz v. Beltz 466 N.W.2d 765 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Beltz v. Beltz 466 N.W.2d 765 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Welsh v. Welsh 446 N.W.2d 191 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Welsh v. Welsh 446 N.W.2d 191 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
($5,580 yearly increase).
Marriage of Warwick v. Warwick 438 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Marriage of Warwick v. Warwick 438 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
(“The trial court may properly consider earning capacity and earnings history to determine a party’s ability to comply with a child support order”).
Marriage of Diedrich v. Diedrich 424 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Diedrich v. Diedrich 424 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
-83 (Minn.1986); at 416 (Minn.App.1986).
Marriage of Nelson v. Quade 413 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Nelson v. Quade 413 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Hedburg v. Hedburg 412 N.W.2d 43 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Hedburg v. Hedburg 412 N.W.2d 43 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Spooner v. Spooner 410 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Spooner v. Spooner 410 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
5 (can consider the parties’ debts in the determination of child support); (given the evidentiary difficulty in determining the net income of self-employed persons, trial court may consider the earning capacity and earning history of the noncustodial self-employed party).
Marriage of Quaid v. Quaid 403 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
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
Marriage of Quaid v. Quaid 403 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(trial courts “may properly consider earning capacity and earnings history to determine a party’s ability to comply with a child support order”).
Beede v. Law 400 N.W.2d 831 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Beede v. Law 400 N.W.2d 831 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Trial courts “may properly consider earning capacity and earnings history to determine a party’s ability to comply with a child support order.”
Marriage of Olson v. Olson 399 N.W.2d 660 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Olson v. Olson 399 N.W.2d 660 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
n. 1 (Minn.Ct.App.1986).