Search for: "Wife B v. Husband B" Results 181 - 200 of 1,232
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jan 2016, 8:29 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Since he failed to demonstrate good cause for his failure to seek such relief, the court properly entered judgment for the full amount of the arrears (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236[B][9][b]. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 1:35 am by David Kopel
Utah’s anti-bigamy ordinance has a normal provision, and an unusual provision: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 3:14 pm
He and Rodriguez lived together as husband and wife for a number of years. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 8:29 am
Shortly thereafter the husband issued an application for ancillary relief.When the case first came on for hearing in March 2009, Mr Justice Charles took the view that it was not then ready for trial on a central dispute of fact, namely that the wife had undisclosed substantial assets or ready access to such assets. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 3:38 pm by Law Lady
BONATI, M.D., P.A.; MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF PASCO COUNTY, d/b/a THE BONATI INSTITUTE; JAMES S. [read post]
5 Jul 2015, 10:00 pm by Linda A. Kerns
Wife had primary custody of the children, and Husband paid child support to Wife. [read post]
2 Dec 2012, 9:01 pm by Neil Cahn
 Quinn’s July 15, 2011 order as directed the husband to pay both 100% of certain carrying charges on the marital residence and temporary maintenance to the wife. [read post]
19 Feb 2011, 10:40 pm by Stephen Page
That approach was adopted by Strickland J in Parker v Parker [2010] FamCA 664 (3 August 2010). [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 9:04 am by Woodruff Family Law Group
Memo. 2018-20, 2018 WL 1040955 (2018)   (a) Facts: The wife sued the husband for divorce in Maryland. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 5:01 am by James Edward Maule
If he did, the outcome in the former wife’s case would be inconsistent with a deduction by the former husband. [read post]