Husband successfully challenged the trial court’s determination that court lacked jurisdiction to modify his spousal support obligation. Appellate Court adopted husband’s position that the trial court retained jurisdiction to modify spousal maintenance, where decree provided that the court specifically retained jurisdiction “as provided by law.”
In post-dissolution of marriage proceeding, the trial court denied father’s bill of costs following his successful appeal of an earlier judgment and sentence for contempt. Father appealed.
Former husband appealed from order of the Morgan County District Court valuing his interest as beneficiary in trust in dissolution action.
Although the court did not find in favor of mother’s argument that the court was prohibited from appointing a parenting coordinator due to her allegations of past domestic abuse, the court did rule that the trial court erred in the length of appointment and in assigning the duties of a special master to the parenting coordinator. The parenting coordinator may make recommendations as to resolution of parenting disputes, but cannot issue binding decisions absent agreement of the parties. Further, the appellate court agreed with mother that the trial court failed to make findings sufficient to modify decision-making and exceeded its statutory authority pertaining to relocation orders.
Wife appealed from decision of the Douglas County District Court dividing parties’ property and denying her request for attorney fees.
Legal malpractice case. Plaintiff contends the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The Court of Appeals agrees. If a trial court judgment is based on determinations of multiple issues — any of which standing independently would be sufficient to support the result — the judgment is not conclusive with respect to any of the issues standing alone.