Legal Opinion · Dissent

Nance v. Nance

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided July 31, 1989No. 89-CA-158Published

1Dissent

BOWES, Judge,

dissenting (in part):

I recognize, as the majority states in their opinion, that a trial judge has much discretion in a factual finding of fault and his findings should not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly wrong. However, I disagree with my learned brothers in their apparent view that the trial judge’s reasons here were sufficient to find the wife’s fault serious enough to deny her permanent alimony.

The trial judge’s oral reasons are quoted in the majority opinion and I note that he found “that while the husband may be greatly at fault, the wife also has some fault.” Then…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pearce v. PearceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1977
  2. Baham v. BahamLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1984
  3. Oster v. OsterLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API