Rock v. Rock

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Rock v. Rock

132 S.E.2d 342, 260 N.C. 223, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 665

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 18, 1963

Docket107

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 132 S.E.2d 342 (Rock v. Rock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rock v. Rock, 132 S.E.2d 342, 260 N.C. 223, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 665 (N.C. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The facts found by the judge are set out in the order and are sufficient to support it. There was evidence at the hearing tending to support the findings of fact.

All assignments of error have been abandoned except Nos. 8 and 11 which challenge the power of the court to enter an order modifying the previous order unless predicated upon a finding of a material change in the •circumstances of the parties.

It is conceded by the appellee that a change of condition and circumstances must be established before an order for the support of children and permanent alimony can be modified. However, the amount the defendant is required to pay for the support of his child and for reasonable subsistence of the plaintiff pendente lite and for compensation to her counsel, is determinable by the judge in the exercise of his sound discretion. And in the absence of an abuse of discretion, his decision is not reviewable. Tiedemann v. Tiedemann, 204 N.C. 682, 169 S.E. 422; Wright v. Wright, 216 N.C. 693, 6 S.E. 2d 555.

An order for subsistence pendente lite may be modified at any time before the trial on application of either party. G.S. 50-16.

The order entered below is

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The facts found by the judge are set out in the order and are sufficient to support it. There was evidence at the hearing tending to support the findings of fact.

All assignments of error have been abandoned except Nos. 8 and 11 which challenge the power of the court to enter an order modifying the previous order unless predicated upon a finding of a material change in the •circumstances of the parties.

It is conceded by the appellee that a change of condition and circumstances must be established before an order for the support of children and permanent alimony can be modified. However, the amount the defendant is required to pay for the support of his child and for reasonable subsistence of the plaintiff pendente lite and for compensation to her counsel, is determinable by the judge in the exercise of his sound discretion. And in the absence of an abuse of discretion, his decision is not reviewable. Tiedemann v. Tiedemann, 204 N.C. 682, 169 S.E. 422; Wright v. Wright, 216 N.C. 693, 6 S.E. 2d 555.

An order for subsistence pendente lite may be modified at any time before the trial on application of either party. G.S. 50-16.

The order entered below is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E.2d 342, 260 N.C. 223, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rock-v-rock-nc-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack