Legal Opinion
Ridgely v. Ridgely
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided February 21, 1963No. 3139PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Chief Judge.
A husband appeals from an order awarding maintenance to his wife and requiring him to convey to her a half interest in their joint bank account and a half interest in Maryland real estate owned by them as tenants by the entireties.
A preliminary claim of error is that the trial court failed to make the findings of fact and conclusions of law required by Rule 11 of the Domestic Relations Branch. This claim is without merit. The rule does not require oral findings and any inadequacy in the oral findings was cured by the written findings of fact and conclusions of law signed by…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Fleischman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Keen v. KeenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948
- Columbian Carbon Co. v. KightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1955
- Settle v. SettleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1925
- Reilly v. ReillyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Butler v. ButlerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1968
- Arthur v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- Travis v. BensonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Farmer v. FarmerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Roberts & Lloyd, Inc. v. ZyblutDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.