Legal Opinion

Pierce v. Otte

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 27, 1943No. 15,071PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bakke

In this case, based upon the same record and involving the same parties as in Otte v. Pierce, 111 Colo. 386, 142 P. (2d) 280, it appears that the wife, before filing her answer in that suit (filed July 8, 1941), filed a motion for temporary alimony, court costs and attorney’s fee, which motion was heard August 7, 1941. Evidence at this hearing shows that the husband is worth about $25,000 and has an income of over $500 a month. The court ordered him to pay $35.00 a week pendente lite, $100.00 attorney’s fee, and costs. The husband paid the $100.00 attorney’s fee, the costs to date, and made…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cosfriff Bros. v. MillerWyoming Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Kiefer v. KieferColorado Court of Appeals · 1894
  3. Eickhoff v. EickhoffSupreme Court of Colorado · 1902
  4. Otte v. PierceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1943
  5. Taylor v. TaylorColorado Court of Appeals · 1896

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. McGhee v. McGheeIdaho Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Otte v. PierceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API