Marriage of Campion v. Campion
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CRIPPEN, Judge.
Clarence Campion appeals from the trial court’s decree dissolving the parties’ marriage and distributing their property. He claims that the trial court’s characterization of some of the parties’ property as marital was erroneous. He also claims that the trial court erroneously awarded attorney’s fees to Mary Campion and reserved jurisdiction over the issue of maintenance. We affirm.
FACTS
The parties were married in 1952 and dissolved their marriage in 1985. During the course of the marriage, the couple accumulated substantial property investments. Appellant Clarence…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hertz v. HertzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Marriage of Schmitz v. SchmitzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- Van De Loo v. Van De LooCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Johnson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Marriage of Kottke v. KottkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Marriage of Gottsacker v. GottsackerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- Marriage of Chamberlain v. ChamberlainCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
- Marriage of White v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
- Freking v. FrekingCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Marriage of Johnson v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.