Skip to main content

Eckert v. Eckert

Citations

  • 216 N.W.2d 837
  • 299 Minn. 120
  • 1974 Minn. LEXIS 1423

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that when there is no existing spousal-maintenance obligation and the district court has not reserved “jurisdiction” over spousal maintenance, the district court has no authority to address the issue
  • holding court may not renew maintenance after end of original term
  • stating “that there cannot be modification of something that has ceased to exist”
  • When a trial court terminates the obligation to pay alimony it is without power to reinstate alimony unless that authority is reserved.
  • When a trial court terminates the obligation to pay alimony it is without power to reinstate alimony unless that authority is reserved.
  • trial courts have statutory power to modify or terminate alimony but cannot reinstate it unless “jurisdiction to thereafter reinstate alimony ... in the matter is reserved”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gordon L. McRae

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.