Legal Opinion

Painter v. Painter

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 2, 1974No. 7429DC523PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Judge.

The defendant argues on appeal that the trial court erred in finding that the plaintiff was entitled to alimony 'pendente lite under G.S. 50-16.3 and counsel fees under G.S. 50-16.4. In the alternative, defendant argues that the terms of the trial court’s award exceeded its discretion.

It appears from the court’s order that the defendant is required to pay $25.00 per week for the support of a child who was not eighteen years of age at the time of the award but became eighteen pending- appeal. As defendant states in his brief, the correctness of the child support order is now moot.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Schloss v. SchlossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Sprinkle v. SprinkleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
  3. Brady v. BradySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. Myers v. MyersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  5. Lemons v. LemonsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Haddon v. HaddonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  2. Townson v. TownsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API