In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Chuman

Court of Appeals of Oregon

In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Chuman

516 P.2d 1306, 16 Or. App. 16, 1973 Ore. App. LEXIS 663

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided December 17, 1973·No. 72-1242·Published

Opinion

FOET, J.

This is an appeal by the husband from the portions of the decree relating to' alimony, division of property and attorney fees.

Our examination of the transcript satisfies us that the award of alimony of $200 a month in favor of petitioner is not an unreasonable sum for respondent, a successful, practicing dentist, to pay. Petitioner has the custody of the three minor children with child support aggregating $450 a month for them. Eespondent received the home. Thus, the wife must bear the cost of providing a satisfactory home. Furthermore, both such awards remain subject to modification as provided in OES 107.135 (1) (a). Finally, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the petitioner an attorney fee of $1,500. The property settlement agreement gave the husband his dental practice including the accounts receivable, and the home, subject to outstanding obligations. The husband accepts these but challenges the award of $12,000. We think the division of property was well within the discretion of the court.

Affirmed.

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

FOET, J.

This is an appeal by the husband from the portions of the decree relating to' alimony, division of property and attorney fees.

Our examination of the transcript satisfies us that the award of alimony of $200 a month in favor of petitioner is not an unreasonable sum for respondent, a successful, practicing dentist, to pay. Petitioner has the custody of the three minor children with child support aggregating $450 a month for them. Eespondent received the home. Thus, the wife must bear the cost of providing a satisfactory home. Furthermore, both such awards remain subject to modification as provided in OES 107.135 (1) (a). Finally, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the petitioner an attorney fee of $1,500. The property settlement agreement gave the husband his dental practice including the accounts receivable, and the home, subject to outstanding obligations. The husband accepts these but challenges the award of $12,000. We think the division of property was well within the discretion of the court.

Affirmed.

In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Chuman, 516 P.2d 1306, 16 Or. App. 16, 1973 Ore. App. LEXIS 663 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

516 P.2d 1306 (In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Chuman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.