Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kitchar v. Kitchar, 553 N.W.2d 97.

25 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
A district court may deny conduct-based fees if both parties “contributed to the unnecessary length of the[] proceedings.” n.5 (Minn. App. 1996), rev. denied (Minn. July 10, 1996); (noting that “the actions of both parties contributed to the expense involved in this case” in affirming denial of conduct-based fees), rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
Kidane Sante Shulbe v. Ashley Rose Henke Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Kidane Sante Shulbe v. Ashley Rose Henke Minn. Ct. App. 2025
1; (declining to award either party attorney fees on appeal when “both parties presented colorable legal arguments on difficult issues”), rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Marriage of: Susan Lee Wood, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A refusal to award attorney fees will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Marriage of: Sharon Nelson, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“An appellate court does not require the trial court to be exact in its valuation of assets, it is only necessary that the value arrived at lies within a reasonable range of figures.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Sept.
In re the Marriage of: Thomas M. Dillahunt, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Mitchell contends that “[t]he District Court erred in denying [her] request for attorney fees based on [Dillahunt’s] conduct and the parties’ agreement.”1 “A refusal to award attorney fees will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
1 (2018).4 “A refusal to award attorney fees will not be reversed absent a c l e a r a b u s e o f discretion.” Kitchar v. Kitchar , review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Oct.
A18-1065 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A refusal to award attorney fees will not be reversed absent a c l e a r a b u s e o f discretion.” Kitchar v. Kitchar , review denied (Minn. Oct.
A18-1087 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Kitchar v. Kitchar , (declining to award attorney fees on appeal where “both parties presented colorable legal arguments on difficult issues”), review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Estate of: Donald H. Richter, deceased Gerald Donald Richter, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Kitchar v. Kitchar , (providing an exception where a party who learns of a new underlying fact during trial may preserve the issue for appeal by raising it in a posttrial motion), review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Marriage of: Andrew James Carl Trupe v. Christin Marie Sohns Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Andrew James Carl Trupe v. Christin Marie Sohns Minn. Ct. App. 2016
An award of conduct-based attorney fees is unwarranted when a party presents a “colorable legal argument[].” review denied (Minn. Oct.
In re the Welfare of the Child of J.K.T. 814 N.W.2d 76 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
In re the Welfare of the Child of J.K.T. 814 N.W.2d 76 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Zentz v. Graber 760 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
1; review denied (Minn. Oct.
In Re the Trusteeship of the Trust of Williams 631 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Trusteeship of the Trust of Williams 631 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Marriage of Geske v. Marcolina 624 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Geske v. Marcolina 624 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(affirming denial of conduct-based attorney fees where, among other things, both parties contributed to expense of case), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(addressing competing appraisals), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Kaiser-Bauer v. Mullan 609 N.W.2d 905 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Kaiser-Bauer v. Mullan 609 N.W.2d 905 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-02 (Minn.1986) (ruling new-trial motion required to preserve for appellate review issues arising at trial); (stating error first argued on appeal and not basis of new-trial motion or otherwise presented to trial court may not be considered on appeal), review denied (Minn. Oct.