Legal Opinion

Hagen v. Hagen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 22, 1942No. 33,186PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Julius J. Olson, Justice.

The parties to this suit, both being represented by able counsel, were divorced in 19S7. In the decree of divorce this appears: “That the parties hereto have effected a full and complete settlement between themselves of all their property rights and as to all matters pertaining to support money and alimony,” all as stated in the findings; and that the settlement between the parties as to their property rights “shall be binding and effective upon both the plaintiff and defendant herein.” Judgment was to “be entered accordingly.” It was so entered and has been adhered…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Quist v. QuistSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
  2. Clarizio v. CastiglianoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
  3. Barndt v. SearleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Mark v. MarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  2. Peercy v. PeercySupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
  3. Ramsay v. RamsaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  4. Botkin v. BotkinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  5. Hafner v. HafnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API