Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 7.10 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Renumbered 16A.014]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1992–2018 · leading case: Lee v. Lee, 775 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. 2009).
Lee v. Lee, 775 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. 2009). · cites it 2× “Thomas Oldham, Divorce, Separation and the Division of Property § 7.10 (2000) (stating that courts do not consider it improper to include pension rights earned after divorce as available for possible maintenance because such rights would not have been included in initial…”
State v. Galvan, 912 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. 2018). · cites it 2× “§ 7.10(a). In fact, acts that support an inference of premeditation demonstrate that the passion had cooled before the killing.”
State v. Thunberg, 492 N.W.2d 534 (Minn. 1992). “Scott, Substantive Criminal Law § 7.10(b)(10) (1986). See, e.g., Bishop v.”
— Minn. Stat. § 7.10(a) — 1 case
State v. Galvan, 912 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. 2018). “§ 7.10(a). In fact, acts that support an inference of premeditation demonstrate that the passion had cooled before the killing.”
— Minn. Stat. § 7.10(b)(10) — 1 case
State v. Thunberg, 492 N.W.2d 534 (Minn. 1992). “Scott, Substantive Criminal Law § 7.10(b)(10) (1986). See, e.g., Bishop v.”
— Minn. Stat. § 7.10(e) — 1 case
State v. Galvan, 912 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. 2018). “§ 7.10(a). In fact, acts that support an inference of premeditation demonstrate that the passion had cooled before the killing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.