Heinze v. Heinze

119 N.W. 489, 107 Minn. 563, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 602
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJanuary 29, 1909
DocketNos. 15,893—(135)
StatusPublished

This text of 119 N.W. 489 (Heinze v. Heinze) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Heinze v. Heinze, 119 N.W. 489, 107 Minn. 563, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 602 (Mich. 1909).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In an action for divorce, temporary alimony was allowed the plaintiff and respondent. On February 27, 1908, an order and decree was entered in favor of plaintiff, granting her a separation from bed and board, and requiring defendant and appellant to pay her during separation for her support the sum. of $75 per month. A stay of forty days from said date was granted. After the expiration of this stay, on June 6, 1908, and before the judgment and decree was entered, the respondent again moved the court for an allowance as temporary alimony and counsel fees. Thereafter the court granted temporary alimony to the amount of $50 per month and counsel fees to the amount of $100, $50 of which was to be paid forthwith and balance when notice of appeal should be served upon respondent’s attorney. Defendant appealed from that order. The result of these orders was that plaintiff obtained the right to compel defendant to pay her $75 per month as permanent alimony and for part of the same period an additional $50 per month as temporary alimony. The order did not provide that payment made under it should be credited on the permanent alimony to be provided for in decree to be entered. This was obviously improper, so far as allowance of alimony is concerned. The order is accordingly reversed. No statutory costs should be taxed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 N.W. 489, 107 Minn. 563, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heinze-v-heinze-minn-1909.