Gulleson v. Gulleson
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1941, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Dahl v. Dahl (Minn. 1941)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The defendant has attempted to bring here for review an order of the district court adjudging him guilty of contempt for failure to comply with the provisions of a judgment and decree requiring the payment of alimony and support money. Obviously the punishment was imposed for the sole benefit of the plaintiff, upon whose *410 motion the proceedings were instituted, and is not one to punish the relator for criminal contempt, that is, one which obstructs the administration of justice or tends to bring the courts into disrepute. Hence review by writ of certiorari does not lie. State ex rel. Hurd v. Willis, 61 Minn. 120, 63 N. W. 169.
The writ is quashed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.