Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hutchinson v. Hutchinson

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided March 22, 2002No. 2001214Published

1DissentMurdock, Judge

Our Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a trial-court determination arising from an ore tenus divorce proceeding is due deference:

“ ‘In reviewing the [circuit] court’s judgment in a divorce case presented ore tenus, we will presume the judgment to be correct....’’ Ex parte Jackson, 567 So.2d 867, 868 (Ala.1990). Furthermore, rulings on such matters as child support, alimony, division of marital property, and payment of marital debts are within the discretion of the circuit court. See id. Thus, a circuit court’s divorce judgment, including its rulings on these matters, will not be reversed…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hall v. MazzoneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Rogers Foundation Repair, Inc. v. PowellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1999
  3. Ex Parte AnonymousSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
  4. Justice v. ARAB LUMBER AND SUPPLY, INC.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1988
  5. Ex Parte ElliottSupreme Court of Alabama · 2000

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API