Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Lynch v. Lynch, 411 N.W.2d 263.
-
In re the Marriage of: Andrew Lowe Billett v. RuthAnne Billett
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
McCulloch v. McCulloch , ().
-
In re the Marriage of: Jeffrey Herman Goldenberg v. Karen Lisa Yashar
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Lynch v. Lynch , (“The trial court found that [the spouse seeking maintenance] is chronically ill and presently disabled with no clear prognosis for recovery.”), review denied (Minn. Oct.
-
In re the Marriage of: Nathan Gregory Olstad v. Stephanie Christine Olstad
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
The relevant inquiry in determining whether money is gross income is whether it is a “periodic payment to an individual.” Haefele, d at 710 (quoting Minn. Stat. § 518A.29(a)); see Lynch v. Lynch , (“Bonuses which provide a dependable source of income may properly be included in calculation of future income”), review denied (Minn. Oct.
-
In re the Marriage of: Tamara Ann Fonoti v. Mace Faamasani Fonoti
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[D]ebts are apportioned as part of the property settlement and are treated in the same manner as the division of assets.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
-
In re the Marriage of: Larry A. Letsinger v. Lori A. Letsinger
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
And this court has previously explained that “[b]onuses which provide a depe ndable source of income may properly be included in calculation of future income.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
-
In re the Marriage of: Laura Diane Hermer v. Lawrence James Cisek, Jr.
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“In dissolution actions, debts are apportioned as part of the property settlement and are treated in the same manner as the division of assets.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
- 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
“Bonuses which provide a dependable source of income may properly be included in calculation of future income.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
- In re the Marriage of: Pamela Kay Beltrand v. Thomas Leo Beltrand Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
In re the Marriage of: Pamela Kay Beltrand v. Thomas Leo Beltrand
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
15, 2011); (“Bonuses which provide a dependable source of income may properly be included in calculation of future income.”), review denied (Minn. Oct.
- Marriage of McConnell v. McConnell 710 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
-
Marriage of McConnell v. McConnell
710 N.W.2d 583
Minn. Ct. App. 2006
“[Pjoor health is a proper reason for awarding permanent maintenance.” (affirming a permanent-maintenance award when the parties enjoyed an affluent lifestyle during the marriage and the obligee, a homemaker during the parties’ almost 30-year marriage, was “chronically ill and presently disabled with no clear prognosis for recovery, without professional training or a
- Marriage of Korf v. Korf 553 N.W.2d 706 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
-
Marriage of Korf v. Korf
553 N.W.2d 706
Minn. Ct. App. 1996
review denied (Minn. Oct.
- Barnier v. Wells 476 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
- Barnier v. Wells 476 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
- Marriage of Rask v. Rask 445 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- Marriage of Rask v. Rask 445 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- Marriage of McCulloch v. McCulloch 435 N.W.2d 564 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
-
Marriage of McCulloch v. McCulloch
435 N.W.2d 564
Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Lastly, when a trial court sets a party’s maintenance obligation, “[bjonuses which provide a dependable source of income may properly be included in calculation of future income.” pet.