Legal Opinion
Mjolsness v. Mjolsness
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 12, 1985No. C3-84-1197PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PARKER, Judge.
Carl Mjolsness seeks a partition of real property purchased singly by Lucille Mjolsness, alleging he is entitled to one-half of the property as a putative spouse or under equitable theories of constructive trust and contract. Lucille counterclaimed for damages. The trial court found Carl had no legal or equitable interest in the real property and denied Lucille’s counterclaim. We affirm.
FACTS
Carl Mjolsness and Lucille Mjolsness were married in 1946 and divorced on March 23, 1970. Carl was served with the divorce decree within a few days of issuance.
Carl testified that on…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Knox v. KnoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- City of Minnetonka v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- In Re Estate of EriksenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Roske v. IlykanyicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Roberge v. Cambridge Cooperative Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Acton Construction Co. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- Searles v. SearlesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Wilson v. SkogerboeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- Marriage of Choa Yang Xiong v. Su XiongCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Mekhail v. North Memorial Health CareDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2024