Reavis v. Reavis
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
The determinative question here is whether the trial court had authority to order repayment of a portion of the lump sum, which in obedience to a final judgment had been paid in full. Defendant argues that the lump sum payment represented at least in part a property settlement, and therefore could not be modified since it had been fully executed. Plaintiff argues that the $17,000.00 was paid solely for child support and that orders for child support, including lump sum payments, are modifiable at any time.
I
We first consider what type of question this appeal presents in order to…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Walters v. WaltersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Rowe v. RoweSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Lawing v. LawingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Bunker v. Bunker.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- White v. GrahamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Blevins v. WelchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Faucette v. 6303 Carmel Road, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
- Cleveland Construction, Inc. v. Ellis-Don Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- Kniep v. TempletonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- Goff v. GoffCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.