Legal Opinion

Christensen v. Healey

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 3, 2017No. A16-1056PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOOTEN, Judge

Appellant father challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to modify parenting time. Although appellant characterized his motion as only a request for equal parenting time or, in the alternative, increased parenting time, the district court nonetheless construed his request as a motion to change physical custody and the child’s primary residence. Reasoning that both of these types of relief require the moving party to show that the child is endangered in the child’s current custodial arrangement, the district court denied appellant’s request for equal parenting…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Marriage of Rutten v. RuttenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  2. Rosenfeld v. RosenfeldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  3. Marriage of Goldman v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
  4. STATE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY BY THE SPECIAL COMPENSATION FUND v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  5. Marriage of Clark v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Christensen v. Healey (In re M.J.H.)Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API