Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re the Marriage Nimmo

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 13, 1995No. 94SC134Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Mullarkey

The majority affirms in part and reverses in part the court of appeals’ decision in In re Marriage of Seanor, 876 P.2d 44 (Colo.App.1993). Because I would affirm the court of appeals’ decision, I respectfully dissent from the partial reversal.

The majority in this case holds that “[t]he source of money available to Ms. Seanor is not the relevant factor,” maj. op. at 1006, and, in order to determine Ms. Seanor’s income, the majority allows discovery of all amounts Mr. Seanor has paid directly to her. Id. at 1008. It excludes direct payments made by Mr. Seanor to third parties for household…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Martinelli v. DIST. COURT IN & FOR CITY, ETC.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  2. J.P. v. District Court in & for the 2nd Judicial District of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  3. Martinelli v. District Court in & for the City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  4. In Re the Marriage of ConradsonColorado Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. In Re the Marriage of SeanorColorado Court of Appeals · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API