Hager v. Hager
| Decision Date | 28 August 1974 |
| Citation | 53 Ala.App. 740,299 So.2d 751 |
| Parties | Herbert HAGER v. Clotyle S. HAGER (Stead). Civ. 283. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
On Remand from Supreme Court.
Upon remand to this court by the Supreme Court of Alabama, it is considered that this cause should be affirmed in accordance with the opinion rendered by the Supreme Court on August 8, 1974, 293 Ala. 47, 299 So.2d 743, in the above styled cause.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
9 cases
-
Johnson v. Johnson
...time of the divorce...." ' " (quoting Burnett v. Burnett, 339 So.2d 68, 69 (Ala. Civ. App. 1976), quoting in turn Hager v. Hager, 293 Ala. 47, 55, 299 So.2d 743, 750 (1974) )). In Beck v. Beck, 142 So.3d 685, 695 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013), we explained:"The burden of proving the value of marita......
-
Laminack v. Laminack
...417 (Ala.1994). In a landmark case, our supreme court distinguished between alimony in gross and periodic alimony. See Hager v. Hager, 293 Ala. 47, 299 So.2d 743 (1974). See also Ex parte Reuter, 623 So.2d 737, 738 (Ala.1993). The court held in Hager that, unlike periodic alimony, alimony i......
-
Brunner v. Ormsby
...of the alimony and the termination clause support a conclusion that the payments are in fact periodic alimony. "In Hager v. Hager, 293, Ala. 47, 299 So.2d 743 (1974), the Supreme Court of Alabama interpreted a clause in a Decree of Divorce which contained a termination clause similar to the......
-
Pylant v. Pylant
... ... estate and the parties' separate estates and not on the anticipated future earnings of the payor." Our supreme court explained:"In [Ex parte] Hager,[ 293 Ala. 47, 299 So.2d 743 (1974),] this Court defined alimony in gross and periodic alimony as follows:" "Alimony in gross" is the present value ... ...
Request a trial to view additional results