Gilman v. Gilman
Nevada Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSpringer, C. J.
I concur in the Gilman case and dissent in the Callahan case.
The reason that I agree with the judgment in the Gilman case is that the family court properly applied the agreed-upon standard for modifying support, namely, whether the person with whom Marjorie was cohabiting “significantly” contributed to her support. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, the court simply ruled that the “adult male” with whom Marjorie was cohabiting did not “significantly contribute” to her support and that, therefore, Richard was not entitled to relief. The court was acting well within its discretion…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hay v. HayNevada Supreme Court · 1984
- Western States Construction, Inc. v. MichoffNevada Supreme Court · 1992
- In Re Marriage of LeibCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Vasquez v. CourtneyOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- In Re Marriage of ThweattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979