Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Donarski v. Donarski

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1998No. Civil 970379Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partVande Walle, Chief Justice

[¶ 28] I do not believe either statutory law or ease law supports the trial court’s Order that Kenneth pay one-half of BethAnn’s reasonable college education expenses, including books, tuition and housing incurred in pursuing a four-year degree... I therefore dissent to part VIII of the majority opinion. I concur in the remainder of the opinion.

[¶ 29] There is no evidence that the parties agreed to provide such support upon divorce. Surely the fact the parents established a college savings account is not, alone, evidence of such an agreement. If it is, it may well have a chilling effect on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Steffes v. SteffesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Botner v. BotnerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Garbe v. GarbeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  4. O'Neill v. O'NeillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Freyer v. FreyerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

2 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