Legal Opinion

Holloway v. . Holloway

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 4, 1939PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaeNHILL, J.

'In determining the question presented on this appeal

it may be well to briefly review the instances in which a wife is entitled to alimony pendente lite and counsel fees and the law in respect thereto : (1) On a motion for alimony pendente lite and counsel fees in an action instituted by a wife against her husband under the provisions of C. S., 1666, whether the wife is entitled to alimony is a question of law upon the facts found, and the court below must find the facts, upon request. Moore v. Moore, 130 N. C., 333, 41 S. E., 943; McManus v. McManus, 191 N. C., 740, 133 S. E., 9; Caudle v.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Moore v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
  2. McManus v. . McManusSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Price v. . PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. Medlin v. . MedlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  5. Reeves v. . ReevesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Rickert v. RickertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. Byers v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. Williams v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. Byers v. ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  5. Schloss v. SchlossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

22 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