Legal Opinion

Pearson v. Pearson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 26, 1985No. C5-84-1010PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEDGWICK, Judge.

Husband appeals the property settlement, maintenance and insurance provisions of a dissolution decree. We affirm in part, reverse and remand in part.

FACTS

Lawrence and Madelyn Pearson were both 58 when their 36 year marriage was dissolved in May 1984. During the marriage Lawrence worked as a teacher. His 1983-84 salary was $30,697. He nets approximately $1,700 per month. He has a vested pension which would yield $1,200 per month if he retired immediately. He plans to retire soon. In addition, he has a vested interest in a tax-sheltered annuity with a present value of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Marriage of Schmitz v. SchmitzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  2. Marriage of Kottke v. KottkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  3. Marriage of Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Woosnam v. WoosnamCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1979

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Marriage of Rosenberg v. RosenbergCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Marriage of Campion v. CampionCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Marriage of Linderman v. LindermanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Marriage of Cummings v. CummingsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. Marriage of Riley v. RileyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985

12 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