White

White v. White

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 905·96 Cal. App. 765·274 P. 990
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 14, 1929Docket No. 3733.California422 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plummer, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from that portion of an interlocutory decree of divorce awarding the respondent counsel fees and alimony upon her cross-complaint. The interlocutory decree granted the respondent a divorce, alimony, and counsel fees in the sum of $100. The record shows that no counsel fees were asked for during the pendency of the trial, and not until after the termination thereof, when the court in its findings found that $100 was a reasonable amount to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant as and for her counsel fees, and the same was written into the interlocutory decree of divorce. So far as the award of alimony or maintenance is concerned, we will pass that by with the simple statement that the court had jurisdiction to award the same. As to the allowance of counsel fees, the respondent relies upon the case of Newlands v. Superior Court, 171 Cal. 741 [ 154 Pac. 829 ]. The facts set out in the opinion in that case show, however, that it is wholly inapplicable to the case at bar. In the Newlands case a stipulation was entered into to the effect that the court might, upon final determination of the cause, fix the amount of attorney’s fees: In the case at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.