Legal Opinion

Fogartie v. Fogartie

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1952No. 95PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtValeNtine, J.

Tbe defendant contends that the court below committed error in allowing the plaintiff alimony pendente lite and counsel fees. With this we cannot agree.

The statute under which the plaintiff seeks relief (G.S. 50-16) provides two remedies — one, for alimony .without divorce; and the other, for a reasonable subsistence and counsel fees pendente lite. McFetters c. McFetters, 219 N.C. 731, 14 S.E. 2d 833; Taylor v. Taylor, 197 N.C. 197, 148 S.E. 171.

The remedy thus established for the subsistence of the wife pending the trial and final determination of the issues involved and for her counsel fees…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McFetters v. . McFettersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Taylor v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  3. Oldham v. . OldhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Peele v. . PeeleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  5. Ragan v. . RaganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Rickert v. RickertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. Yow v. YowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  3. Schloss v. SchlossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. Mercer v. MercerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Harrell v. HarrellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

13 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