Legal Opinion

In re the Marriage of Whitcomb

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 15, 1979No. D7611-15437, CA 11992PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJoseph, J.

In his petition for reconsideration, husband points out that in other cases we have expressed the view that a decree of dissolution should "seek to disentangle the parties’ financial affairs and make them free from each other’s interference.” Slauson and Slauson, 29 Or App 177, 183-84, 562 P2d 604 (1977); see also Rislove and Rislove, 31 Or App 305, 307, 570 P2d 403 (1977). In our decision in this case, we did not "disentangle” the parties completely, and we made no reference to the quoted principle.

Disentanglement is indeed to be preferred. However, in this instance, we were faced with a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of SlausonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
  2. In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of RisloveCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Matter of Marriage of KathrensCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  2. Matter of Marriage of SteinbrennerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  3. Matter of Marriage of ClappertonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  4. In re the Marriage of KennedyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  5. In re the Marriage of FerranCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

1 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