Legal Opinion
Moore v. Moore
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 10, 2007No. A06-1504PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PETERSON, Judge.
In this maintenance-modification dispute, appellant-husband Randall Moore argues that the district court lacked authority to address a motion to modify maintenance that was served and filed by respondent-wife Carolyn Moore after husband made his last maintenance payment as required. Husband also challenges the award of attorney fees to wife, arguing that the record does not show that wife lacks the ability to pay her own attorney fees. Because we conclude that the district court lost authority to modify maintenance by the time wife made her motion to modify maintenance…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Eberhart v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Sinclair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Marriage of Rubey v. VannettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- Marriage of Karon v. KaronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In re the Appeal from the Final Order of the Board of Managers of the Bois De Sioux Watershed DistrictCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
- Marriage of Gossman v. GossmanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- Charlene Karen Jundt v. Marcus Edward JundtCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024
- DRB 24, LLC, on behalf of itself and other similarly situated property owners in Minneapolis that have been assessed vacant building registration fees in 2013 v. City of MinneapolisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
- In re the Marriage of: Martha Jean Abbott v. James William Abbott LadnerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.