Legal Opinion

Marriage of Anderson v. Anderson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 30, 2017No. A16-2006Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

REILLY, Judge

On appeal from the district court’s refusal to award a retroactive cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) to her spousal-maintenance award, appellant-wife argues that (1) she is entitled to a retroactive COLA under the law-of-the-case doctrine, and (2) the district court abused its discretion by declining to award a COLA retroactive to a date before she provided the statutorily required notice of that COLA. Because the law-of-the-case doctrine does not apply to the circumstances of this case, and because a retroactive COLA is not authorized by statute, the district court did not…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. In Re the Welfare of M.D.O.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  2. State v. DahlinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
  3. Loo v. LooSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
  4. In re the Matter of: Dakota County, Lorinda Elaine Floding, Below v. Darrell Ray GillespieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
  5. Marriage of Buntje v. BuntjeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994

6 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