| a250144 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2026-02-23 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Jaisden Harold-Dru Hanners
|
|
… f an order for protection under section 518B.01; violation of a harassment restraining order under section 609.748; or violation of section 609.749 or 609.79, subdivision 1. “Domestic abuse” a …
|
| a250235 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2026-02-09 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Robert Jon Hill
|
|
… must “comply with all the terms of any active DANCO, Order for Protection, or Harassment Restraining Order.” The district court stated, “There is an active DANCO, so I expect you fully to comply with the DANCO.” The district court did n …
|
| a240413 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2024-11-18 |
Affirmed in part
|
In re the Custody of A. J.-E. L., William Robert Laurie v. Brittany Elizabeth Nebel, ...
|
| a230845 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2024-06-17 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
Justin Dean Schultz v. Analisa French Perkins
|
| a231068 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2024-05-13 |
Affirmed in part and reversed in part
|
Kevin James Kleinschmidt v. Angela Rose Farkash
|
| A16-942 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-12-27 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
In re the Marriage of: Kathleen Jean Rucker v. Kraig Vernon Rucker
|
|
… evidence supports the findings. Early in the separation, respondent obtained a harassment restraining order against appellant. The record shows that appellant was unable to participate in therapy sessions with respondent’s therapist becau …
|
| A15-2022 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-06-20 |
Affirmed in part and reversed in part
|
Lucas Heikkila, individually and o/b/o Minor Children v. Jeff Dietman
|
|
… court’s ex parte temporary harassment restraining order (THRO) and subsequent harassment restraining order (HRO), arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the THRO; (2) the district court abused its discretion in excluding …
|
| A14-1783 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-11-23 |
Affirmed in part
|
State of Minnesota v. John Everette Pierce
|
|
… also seeks vacation of a 50-year domestic-abuse no-contact order and a 50-year harassment restraining order, and he raises additional arguments pro se. We affirm in part and vacate in part. FACTS …
|
| A14-1944 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-09-28 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Fredrick Dewayne Hines
|
|
… mited to” domestic abuse, violation of an order for protection, violation of a harassment restraining order, violation of the harassment/stalking statute, or violation of the harassing/obscene-phone-call statute. Minn. Stat. § 634.20. Do …
|
| A14-1839 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-09-14 |
Affirmed in part
|
State of Minnesota v. Alonzo Williams
|
|
… ssages, and unwelcome visits to T.J.’s home. In November 2013, T.J. obtained a harassment restraining order (HRO) against Williams, but Williams continued to call and text message T.J. Based on the timing and content of the calls and tex …
|
| A14-1431 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-05-26 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
Vickie Williams and o/b/o M. W. v. Phillip A. Rimmer
|
|
… UNPUBLISHED OPINION LARKIN, Judge In this appeal from the grant of a harassment restraining order (HRO), appellant challenges the district court’s determination that he engaged in harassment and argues Retired judge of the M …
|
| A14-71 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2014-12-01 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Ed Cadwell
|
|
… abuse, violation of an order for protection . . .; violation of a harassment restraining order . . .; or [stalking] or [obscene or harassing telephone calls]. The district court may admit relationship evidence “ …
|