Legal Opinion

Gajovski v. Gajovski

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 8, 1991No. 14866PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Reece, Judge.

Does a homosexual relationship constitute concubinage for the purpose of terminating alimony under the terms of a dissolution decree? Danny Lawrence Gajovski, contesting the trial court’s judgment answering that question in the negative, seeks this court’s review. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

Facts

The relevant facts of this case were set forth in detail in the parties’ first appeal to this court in Gajovski v. Gajovski (Jan. 10, 1990), Summit App. No. 14118, unreported, 1990 WL 1758 (Gajovski I). Briefly restated, the trial court dissolved the marriage of Danny Gajovski…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re Declaratory Relief for LadrachStark County Probate Court · 1987
  2. Succession of BacotLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cummings v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2015
  2. Dean v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Dean v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API