Legal Opinion

Reed v. Reed

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 26, 1935No. 2552PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By BODEY, J.

It is claimed on behalf of the plaintiff in error that .the order made by the court in the divorce proceedings was not an order for alimony, and that, unless it was an order for the payment of alimony, the defendant in that case, who is plaintiff in error here, would be absolved from the payment of the notes to F, M. Runyon by reason of his bankruptcy proceedings. The trial court in entering the decree of divorce did not use the word ‘alimony’ or any other noun descriptive of the allowance which was being made to the wife. Counsel tor the plaintiff in error make reference…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Kenneth Leroy Waller, Bankrupt, Madeline R. Waller v. Kenneth Leroy WallerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
  2. Kadel v. KadelClark County Court of Common Pleas · 1969
  3. Schindler v. SchindlerOhio Court of Appeals · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API