Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Marriage of Caddo v. Caddo

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided September 27, 1984No. 3-284A33Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHoffman, Judge

*595I concur in the majority opinion to the extent that it affirms the trial court's failure to award interest on the deferred payment under issue one. See, In re Marriage of Merrill, (1983) Ind.App., 455 N.E.2d 1176; Van Riper v. Keim, (1982) Ind.App., 437 N.E.2d 130.

I dissent to the court's disposition of issue two. The majority fails to take notice of the clear and unequivocal language contained in the statute governing disposition of marital property, which provides as follows:

"(b) In an action pursuant to section 3(a) of this chapter, the court shall divide the property of the parties,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brokaw v. BrokawIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Ross v. RossIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Wilhelm v. WilhelmIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. Van Riper v. KeimIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Henderson v. HendersonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API