Boozer v. Boozer
Opinion
Atkinson, Presiding Justice.
Where there was evidence that the husband was the owner of a S4000 equity in two dwelling houses and a vacant lot on Kirkwood Avenue, S. E., certain tools and equipment used in his business as a plumbing contractor, weekly profits from his business of 8200 per week, and that his wife had lived with him for forty years and raised six children, all of whom had reached their majority, and *53 that she had no independent income and was unable to work; and where the judgment for permanent alimony gave the wife a one-half interest in the equity in the real estate, $25 per week, and $100 as attorney’s fees — this court cannot say as a matter of law that the judgment was excessive.
No. 17095.
June 13, 1950.
Thomas L. Slappey, for plaintiff.
Clarke & Anderson, defendant.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.