Timmons v. Timmons

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Timmons v. Timmons

213 N.W.2d 335, 298 Minn. 523, 1973 Minn. LEXIS 1048

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedDecember 7, 1973

Docket43954

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 213 N.W.2d 335 (Timmons v. Timmons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Timmons v. Timmons, 213 N.W.2d 335, 298 Minn. 523, 1973 Minn. LEXIS 1048 (Mich. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order of the Scott County District Court amending a divorce decree by transferring custody of two daughters, ages 13 and 9, from the mother to the father, leaving an older daughter with the mother.

The mother contends that the admission into evidence of a report of an investigation made by the Scott County Welfare Department was prejudicial, citing Stanford v. Stanford, 266 Minn. 250, 123 N. W. 2d 187 (1963). However, in the instant case plaintiff did not object to the order requesting an investigation, the report was furnished the attorneys and the court without objection, and the welfare investigator was subject to cross-examination. The evidence contained in the report was for the most part cumulative. We hold there was substantial compliance with the guidelines set forth in Stanford and no prejudice resulted.

We are satisfied after examining the record that transferring custody of the youngest daughters to the father was in their best interests.

Attorney’s fees of $300 allowed plaintiff.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order of the Scott County District Court amending a divorce decree by transferring custody of two daughters, ages 13 and 9, from the mother to the father, leaving an older daughter with the mother.

The mother contends that the admission into evidence of a report of an investigation made by the Scott County Welfare Department was prejudicial, citing Stanford v. Stanford, 266 Minn. 250, 123 N. W. 2d 187 (1963). However, in the instant case plaintiff did not object to the order requesting an investigation, the report was furnished the attorneys and the court without objection, and the welfare investigator was subject to cross-examination. The evidence contained in the report was for the most part cumulative. We hold there was substantial compliance with the guidelines set forth in Stanford and no prejudice resulted.

We are satisfied after examining the record that transferring custody of the youngest daughters to the father was in their best interests.

Attorney’s fees of $300 allowed plaintiff.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 N.W.2d 335, 298 Minn. 523, 1973 Minn. LEXIS 1048, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/timmons-v-timmons-minn-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack