Anderson v. Anderson
| Citation | 65 Ariz. 184,177 P.2d 227 |
| Decision Date | 10 February 1947 |
| Docket Number | 4883 |
| Parties | ANDERSON v. ANDERSON |
| Court | Supreme Court of Arizona |
Appeal from Superior Court, Navajo County; W. E. Ferguson, Judge.
Judgment modified and affirmed.
Dodd L Greer, of Holbrook, for appellant.
Guy Axline, of Holbrook, for appellee.
Appellee brought her action for divorce in the Superior Court of Navajo County, alleging that she and appellant inter-married in Gallup, New Mexico, on the 4th day of January, 1942; the amended complaint for divorce was filed on the 27th day of August 1945.
By the amended complaint, the appellee asked, in addition to divorce, the sum of $ 100 per month as alimony; attorney's fees and costs, and for a division of the community estate of the parties to the action. No children were born as issue of the marriage
The judgment of the court awarded appellee two parcels of property, all household furnishings, the sum of $ 75 per month as and for support and maintenance, and certain bonds.
The court awarded appellant that certain business in Holbrook known as the "Holbrook Cleaners" also the Ford automobile.
By appellant's answer, he claimed that he owned as his separate property the cleaning business at the time he married appellee and purchased the two separate pieces of real property awarded to the appellee out of the earnings of said business.
From the judgment of the trial court appellant appealed to the court in part, to-wit: "From that portion of said judgment awarding the real and personal property therein described to said plaintiff, together with that portion of said judgment by which plaintiff was awarded the sum of $ 75 monthly", and appellant assigns as error by the trial court the awarding of the two pieces of real property to appellee, the same being his separate property, also the awarding of $ 75 monthly as alimony.
There are two sections of our code essential to be referred to in determining the issues herein. The first is Section 27-805, A.C.A.1939, which reads in part as follows: * * *"
Sec. 63-302, A.C.A.'39, the other section, reads:
Before marriage, appellee owned a small house and lot in Holbrook, which had an income of about $ 13.00 per month. She also, during the marriage was employed at a salary of $ 125 per month. Appellant, before and during their marriage, operated what is known as "Holbrook Cleaners".
The matter that presents itself to us is, Are the two pieces of property involved and which were awarded to the Appellee and purchased out of the earnings of the Holbrook Cleaners separate or community property?
The appellant testified that he and his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nace v. Nace
...Petzhold, 77 Ariz. 399, 273 P.2d 161 (1954); Lawson v. Ridgeway,72 Ariz. 253, 233 P.2d 459, 29 A.L.R.2d 518 (1951); Anderson v. Anderson,65 Ariz. 184, 177 P.2d 227 (1947); Blaine v. Blaine, 63 Ariz. 100, 159 P.2d 786 (1945); and Estate of Torrey, 54 Ariz. 369, 95 P.2d 990 Ordinarily, of cou......
-
Spector v. Spector
...369, 95 P.2d 990 (1939). See also, Evans v. Evans, 79 Ariz. 284, 288 P.2d 775 (1955); Lawson v. Ridgeway, supra, and Anderson v. Anderson, 65 Ariz. 184, 177 P.2d 227 (1947). Greenberg contends that certain properties owned by Spector prior to the marriage were enhanced in value during the m......
-
Cockrill v. Cockrill
...of the inherent nature of the separate property. See, e. g., Porter v. Porter, 67 Ariz. 273, 195 P.2d 132 (1948); Anderson v. Anderson, 65 Ariz. 184, 177 P.2d 227 (1947); In re Torrey's Estate, 54 Ariz. 369, 95 P.2d 990 (1939); Spector v. Spector, 23 Ariz.App. 131, 531 P.2d 176 If there is ......
-
Lawson v. Ridgeway
...Rundle v. Winters, 38 Ariz. 239, 298 P. 929, 931. To the same effect see Estate of Torrey, 54 Ariz. 369, 95 P.2d 990; Anderson v. Anderson, 65 Ariz. 184, 177 P.2d 227; and Porter v. Porter, 67 Ariz. 273, 195 P.2d 132. It is appellant's contention that, since Lawson had a partner in the part......