Legal Opinion

Marriage of Orman v. Orman

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided March 26, 1985No. C2-84-1904 and C6-85-247PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

The father appeals enforcement of an escalator clause for child support payments. He also challenges the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to the mother. The mother cross appeals denial of prejudgment interest on child support arrear-ages arising under the escalator clause. 1 We affirm.

FACTS

Darlene and Timothy Orman’s marriage was dissolved in January 1975. The dissolution decree gave the mother custody of the couple’s four children and ordered the father to pay $700 per month child support. The decree also included the following escalator clause.

As and for additional…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kirby v. KirbyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  2. Material Movers, Inc. v. HillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  3. Orman v. OrmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Holiday Recreational Industries, Inc. v. Manheim Services Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
  2. Hutchinson Utilities Commission Of The City Of Hutchinson v. Curtiss-Wright CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
  3. Marriage of Redmond v. RedmondCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
  4. Hutchinson Utilities Commission of Hutchinson v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
  5. Marriage of Zickefoose v. MunteanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API