Legal Opinion

Marriage of Wareham v. Wareham

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided December 7, 2010No. A10-726PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUDSON, Judge.

Appellant-mother challenges the order of the child-support magistrate (CSM), dismissing her motion for child-support modification on the ground that the Minnesota tribunal lacked continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its prior support order because neither the parties nor the children for whose benefit the order was issued currently reside in this state. Because the parties have not filed written consents for another state to assume continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over the order, the Minnesota tribunal maintains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to modify its…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Amaral v. Saint Cloud HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  2. Marriage of Goldman v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
  3. Occhino v. GroverCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
  4. Jurado v. BrashearSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2001
  5. Behr v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Castro v. HaughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. Christianson v. HenkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
  3. Stern v. SternCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API