Merchant v. Merchant

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Merchant v. Merchant

638 So. 2d 3, 1994 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 210, 1994 WL 169791

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedMay 6, 1994

DocketAV93000226

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 638 So. 2d 3 (Merchant v. Merchant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Merchant v. Merchant, 638 So. 2d 3, 1994 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 210, 1994 WL 169791 (Ala. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

RICHARD L. HOLMES, Retired Appellate Judge.

This is a divorce case.

The wife appeals, contending that the trial court abused its discretion in the division of property. We affirm.

No useful purpose would be served in detailing the facts pertinent to this appeal.

It is well settled that the trial court is given broad discretion when it is dividing the property and awarding alimony in cases such as the present case. Shelton v. Shelton, 595 So.2d 900 (Ala.Civ.App.1992). The determinations of the trial court will be reversed only upon a showing that there was an abuse of discretion. Shelton, 595 So.2d 900. The property division does not have to be equal, only equitable. Shelton, 595 So.2d 900.

We have reviewed the record in this case. We find that the trial court did' not abuse its discretion in determining the property division and, in fact, we find that the division of property is equitable.

This case is due to be affirmed.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Appellate Judge RICHARD L. HOLMES while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of § 12 — 18—10(e), Code 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.

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