William Howze v. Esther Howze
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Per curiam
With the benefit of full briefing and oral argument, we believe that this appeal was improvidently granted.
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals was correct in its conclusion that “the divorce decree was no longer being relied upon to impose a duty of support on appellant” 225 A.2d 477, 479 (D.C.App.1967). The order at issue was granted in response to appellee’s petition to increase the support payments for her child until the child reached age eighteen. That order, though not specific, was intended to continue at least until the child was seventeen years and three months old, and more…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Howze v. HowzeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967
3Cited by8 opinions
- James D. Hodgson, Secretary of Labor, Mike Trbovich v. United Mine Workers of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
- B & W Management, Inc. v. Tasea Investment Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- National Telephone Cooperative Ass'n v. Exxon Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Albus v. AlbusDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Engelson v. MalleaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.