Nichols v. Nichols, 13733
| Court | Supreme Court of West Virginia |
| Writing for the Court | CAPLAN |
| Citation | 236 S.E.2d 36,160 W.Va. 514 |
| Parties | Mary Louise NICHOLS v. Duane Guy NICHOLS. |
| Docket Number | No. 13733,13733 |
| Decision Date | 05 July 1977 |
Page 36
v.
Duane Guy NICHOLS.
Syllabus by the Court
Questions relating to alimony and to the maintenance and custody of the children are within the sound discretion of the court and its action with respect to such matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused.
[160 W.Va. 515] Wilson, Frame & Rowe, Richard E. Rowe, Morgantown, for appellant.
Edgar F. Heiskell, III, Morgantown, for appellee.
CAPLAN, Chief Justice:
Mary Louise Nichols was granted a divorce from Duane Guy Nichols by a decree of the Circuit Court of Monongalia County dated August 26, 1974. The decree ratified and confirmed a property settlement agreement previously entered into between the parties. Pursuant to the agreement, and as set forth in the final decree, Duane Guy Nichols agreed and was ordered to pay
Page 37
to Mary Louise Nichols the sum of Three Hundred Ten Dollars per month as support and maintenance for each of two children and he further agreed and was ordered to pay to Mary Louise Nichols the sum of One Hundred Ninety Dollars per month as alimony.The decree provided that the alimony was to cease after four years or when she obtained her Master's Degree, whichever occurred first. In addition, Duane Nichols agreed to carry health insurance on the children and to be responsible for their major medical and dental bills; to pay one-half the cost of the children's musical instruction and tutoring expenses, if necessary; pay for their college education; maintain insurance on his life with the children as beneficiaries; and to certain other obligations. The exclusive possession of the marital residence was retained by Mary Louise Nichols and she assumed the obligation of paying the monthly payment on the property which amounted to $312.00 per month.
Approximately fifteen months later, in November, 1975, Duane Nichols was notified that his deposition [160 W.Va. 516] would be taken for the purpose of discovering his true and real financial standing and status. Subsequent to the taking of this deposition, Mary Louise Nichols filed a petition seeking a modification of the August 26, 1974 order, asking for an increase in the support and alimony payments. In this petition, Mary Louise Nichols alleged that there had been a change in circumstances since the August 26, 1974 order, which would merit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Banker v. Banker, No. 22166
...See Syl. Pt. 2, Yanero v. Yanero, 171 W.Va. 88, 297 S.E.2d 863 (1982) (criteria for modification of alimony award); Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 517, 236 S.E.2d 36, 38 (1977) (modification should be denied where litigant "failed to demonstrate a change of circumstances sufficient to j......
-
Pearson v. Pearson, No. 23679
...such matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused." Syl., Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 5. " 'Alimony must not be disproportionate to a [person's] ability to pay as disclosed by the evidence before the court.' Syll......
-
Lambert v. Miller, No. 17159
...matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused." Syllabus, Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 3. Remarriage of a divorced parent, standing alone, is not sufficient to justify modification of a child support order. It is, ......
-
Tevya W. v. Elias Trad V., No. 35760.
...matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused.” Syllabus, Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 (1977). 3. “A reviewing court may not overturn a finding simply because it would have decided the case differently, and it must......
-
Banker v. Banker, No. 22166
...See Syl. Pt. 2, Yanero v. Yanero, 171 W.Va. 88, 297 S.E.2d 863 (1982) (criteria for modification of alimony award); Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 517, 236 S.E.2d 36, 38 (1977) (modification should be denied where litigant "failed to demonstrate a change of circumstances sufficient to j......
-
Pearson v. Pearson, No. 23679
...such matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused." Syl., Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 5. " 'Alimony must not be disproportionate to a [person's] ability to pay as disclosed by the evidence before the court.' Syll......
-
Lambert v. Miller, No. 17159
...matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused." Syllabus, Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 3. Remarriage of a divorced parent, standing alone, is not sufficient to justify modification of a child support order. It is, ......
-
Tevya W. v. Elias Trad V., No. 35760.
...matters will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion has been abused.” Syllabus, Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514, 236 S.E.2d 36 (1977). 3. “A reviewing court may not overturn a finding simply because it would have decided the case differently, and it must......