Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Grocholski v. Grocholski

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided August 5, 2011No. 2090851Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partThomas, Judge

I concur insofar as the main opinion affirms the trial court’s determination that the wife was not entitled to discover the cellular-telephone records of the husband and insofar as it affirms the trial court’s determination that the wife was capable of *134being gainfully employed. I dissent insofar as the main opinion reverses the portion of the trial court’s judgment dividing the marital property and determining the husband’s alimony obligation.

The trial court was confronted with widely disparate testimony regarding the husband’s income and the parties’ living expenses. Faced with the difficult…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. TRANSAMERICA COM. FIN. v. AmSouth BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992
  2. Knight v. Beverly H. C. Bay Manor H. C. Ctr.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2001
  3. B.L.S. v. R.T.S.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2000
  4. Eastis v. Veterans Oil, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2010
  5. Key v. AllisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API