Minnesota Supreme Court, 1963

McCauley v. McCauley

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided November 8, 1963 · Per Curiam

267 Minn. 544; 124 N.W.2d 411; 1963 Minn. LEXIS 793 (Minnesota Reports)

Counsel

Johnson, Essling & Malone, for appellant., Thomas J. Burke, for respondent.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Johnson v. Johnson (R.I. 1973)

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant in divorce proceedings appeals from an order of the district court granting his wife exclusive possession and occupancy of the home of the parties pending determination of the action. 1

We have reviewed the record and are satisfied that the trial court was acting within the area of its discretion in view of testimony reflecting that the tension between the litigants is such as to react unfavorably upon their three children, who must of necessity be maintained in the residence involved. See, Carlson v. Carlson, 234 Minn. 258, 48 N. W. (2d) 58; Minn. St. 518.62.

Affirmed.

Whether such an order is appealable has not been determined specifically. See, Schuster v. Schuster, 84 Minn. 403, 87 N. W. 1014; Brunn v. Brunn, 166 Minn. 283, 207 N. W. 616; Burkholder v. Burkholder, 231 Minn. 285, 43 N. W. (2d) 801; 4 Am. Jur. (2d) Appeal and Error, § 138.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.