Occasionally we read in MN appellate decisions that the appellant "challenges the findings of fact...arguing that the wholesale adoption of respondent's findings of fact...reflect the district court's failure to independently assess the evidence, resulting in a manifest injustice..." quoting here from Guiliani v. Anderson reported in Minn. Lawyer on 11-7-11. The appellant prevailed and the case was remanded for more specific findings. The Court of Appeals cited Bliss, 493 NW2d 583, 590 (Minn. App. 1992) which holds that it is not per se reversible error for the trial court to adopt one party's proposed decree. However, it "raises the question of whether the trial court independently evaluated each party's testimony and evidence." I have always made it my practice to make findings of fact as the evidence is presented in the courtroom, then supplement any proposed findings of fact with my own. Simply adopting one side's proposed decree, even if the opponent is pro se and submits none, may result in reversal and remand.
This case also has helpful discussion of the trial court allowing reasonable accommodations to the unrepresented party.
No comments:
Post a Comment