Legal Opinion
In re the Marriage of Tahat
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided July 31, 2014No. 31454-5-IIIPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFearing, J.
¶1 In this marriage dissolution appeal, we resolve two related procedural questions: (1) was a letter *658ruling by the trial court a “decision” for purposes of commencing the period in which a party must file a motion for reconsideration under CR 59 and (2) should a trial court allow the nonmoving party an opportunity to respond before the trial court grants a motion for reconsideration. We answer the first question in the negative and the second question in the affirmative.
FACTS
¶2 The parties, Mary Rose and Hasan Tahat, met as graduate students in the Philippines. Mary received her doctorate in…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Carroll v. JunkerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
- Jarecki v. G. D. Searle & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United States v. HoughamSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- State v. RoggenkampWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. RoggenkampWashington Supreme Court · 2005
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. BuddCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- In Re the Estate of LoweCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- State of Washington v. Amanda Marie TorresCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
- Geraldine A Maniatis Living Trust, Resp/cross-app v. Malkit Singh, App/cross-respCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
- In Re the Estate of LoweCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.