Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Marriage of Anderson v. Archer, 510 N.W.2d 1.

44 citing documents.

Dametria White, et al., as co-trustees for the next-of-kin of Helayne Bass, deceased, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(interpretation of an order); (ambiguity in an order).
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
v. R.J.S., (concluding that district court erred by not appointing mandatory GAL when circumstances presented “at least a threshold” indication of abuse).1 But “[w]e must defer to the district court’s assessment of witness credibility.”
In the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
4 We reach this conclusion, in part, because the caselaw cited by mother uses the term “substantial” in the context of a “restriction.” which discusses the standard governing a “substantial alteration of visitation rights amounting to a ‘restriction,’ of visitation” which makes a related statement.
In re the Matter of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In re the Matter of: Zoraba Ross v. Angel Raeleen Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Matter of: Zoraba Ross v. Angel Raeleen Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2024
1(a) (2022); (Davies, J., concurring) (stating that district courts should give particular thought to “where the children would get the most benefit, holiday by holiday,” and suggesting factors for consideration).
In re the Marriage of: Jacquelyn Ann Costabilo, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“When determining whether a reduction constitutes a restriction, the court should consider the reasons for the change as well as the amount of the reduction.” Anderson v. Archer , (Mi nn.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“When determining whether a reduction constitutes a restriction, the court should consider the reasons for the change as well as the amount of the reduction.” (citation omitted) .
In the Matter of: Joseph Daryll Rued on behalf of minor child, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(holding that appointment of a GAL was not mandatory because the respondent presented sufficient evidence to rebut appellant’s unsubstantiated allegation of physical abuse); (holding that appointment of a GAL was not mandatory because the
In re the Marriage of: Matthew Durand Dornquast, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
19, 2008) ; Anderson v. Archer , ( “Because the interpretation of a written document is a question of l aw, we do not defer to the district court’ s interpretation of a stipulated provision in a dissolution decree.
In re the Marriage of: Rebekah L. Bennett, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Christine Diane Eyal, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
App. 2008) (citing Olmanson v. LeSueur County , (statutory interpretation); Johnson v. Murray , (subject-matter jurisdiction); Anderson v. Archer , (stipulations in dissolution judgments)), review denied (Aug.
In re the Matter of: Birch Benjamin Hansen v. Suzanne Christine Todnem 891 N.W.2d 51 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Matter of: Birch Benjamin Hansen v. Suzanne Christine Todnem 891 N.W.2d 51 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Jessica Leah Weiss v. Alfred Aaron Griffin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jessica Leah Weiss v. Alfred Aaron Griffin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
at 124; (concluding that a change in parenting time was insubstantial when it was caused by a move to a different state and the parties were left with nearly equal parenting time after the change); -86 (Minn. App. 1984) (concluding that a gradual erosion of parenting
In re the Marriage of: Amy Daiker Werger v. Brett Michael Werger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Amy Daiker Werger v. Brett Michael Werger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 1, 3 (Minn. App. 1993) (clarity); (ambiguity).
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Melissa Louise Constantini v. Brent John Constantini Minn. Ct. App. 2016
see also Minn. Stat. § 518.175, subd.
In re the Marriage of: James Allen Ertl v. Diane Martha Ertl 871 N.W.2d 410 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: James Allen Ertl v. Diane Martha Ertl 871 N.W.2d 410 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-31 (Minn. App. 2008) ().
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Christine Lynn Sypnieski, f/k/a Christine Lynn Holtz v. Kevin Douglas Holtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Marriage of: Becki Anne Suleski, f/k/a Becki Anne Rupe v. Ryan Michael Rupe 855 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Becki Anne Suleski, f/k/a Becki Anne Rupe v. Ryan Michael Rupe 855 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
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
Marriage of Boland v. Murtha 800 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Marriage of Boland v. Murtha 800 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
In Re the Marriage of Dahl v. Dahl 765 N.W.2d 118 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
In Re the Marriage of Dahl v. Dahl 765 N.W.2d 118 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Marriage of Grachek v. Grachek 750 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Marriage of Grachek v. Grachek 750 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
(statutory interpretation); (subject-matter jurisdiction); (stipulations in dissolution judgments).
In Re Welfare of BKP 662 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Neu v. Pollard 662 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Neu v. Pollard 662 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re Welfare of BKP 662 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Marriage of Matson v. Matson 638 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Marriage of Matson v. Matson 638 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
In Re Estate of Rock 612 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
In Re Estate of Rock 612 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Emerick on Behalf of Howley v. Sanchez 547 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Emerick on Behalf of Howley v. Sanchez 547 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 1996