Case library
Nevada family-law decisions, briefed for practice.
Practitioner summaries with key holdings, posture, disposition, and the statutes cited - up front, where you need them. Every summary links to the full opinion.
9 results for “NRS 125.170”
FOLKS VS. FOLKS (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Feb 8, 196177 Nev. 45, 359 P.2d 92 (1961) · 4310 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("The orders appealed from are affirmed. No costs are allowed.")On the wife's appeal from orders terminating alimony and denying arrears, allowances, and fees, the court resolved three issues. First, under NRS 125.180 the court has discretionary power to order entry of judgment for…
DAY VS. DAY (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Sep 9, 196682 Nev. 317, 417 P.2d 914 (1966) · 5048 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part. The court affirmed the judgment on the husband's appeal, and on the wife's cross-appeal reversed the limitation of interest and remanded for calculation and award of interest on the arrearages accruing before January 1, 1960.Collins, J. In a proceeding under NRS 125.180 to reduce accrued arrearages under a 1949 divorce decree to judgment (the underlying agreement having been held merged in the decree, Day v. Day, 80 Nev. 386, 395 P.2d 321…
PLEGER VS. PLEGER (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Jun 27, 196783 Nev. 313, 429 P.2d 554 (1967) · 5223 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("Affirmed.")Per Curiam. On the husband's appeal from denial of his motion to modify the alimony provision of a divorce decree, the court affirmed. The husband moved under NRS 125.170(1), over which the trial court had expressly…
BALLIN VS. BALLIN (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Apr 27, 196278 Nev. 224, 371 P.2d 32 (1962) · 4467 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("Affirmed.")The issue was whether a divorce decree that ratified, approved, and confirmed a property settlement and directed that it survive constituted an "installment judgment for alimony and support" modifiable under NRS…
EDWARDS VS. EDWARDS (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Nov 2, 196682 Nev. 392, 419 P.2d 637 (1966) · 5092 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("Affirmed.")Zenoff, D.J. The husband appealed the denial of his motion to modify the alimony and child support provisions of a 1963 divorce decree (which incorporated the parties' agreement providing $150 monthly alimony and $175…
GRENZ VS. GRENZ (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Sep 24, 196278 Nev. 394, 374 P.2d 891 (1962) · 4210 · Nevada Supreme Court
Remanded with directions and for further proceedings; costs to appellant. ("Remanded with directions and for further proceedings. Costs to appellant.")The court first dismissed the purported appeals from the original and amended findings of fact and conclusions of law, which are not appealable determinations under NRCP 72(b) (Musso v. Triplett, 78 Nev. 355, 372 P.2d…
CAVELL VS. CAVELL (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Sep 13, 197490 Nev. 334, 526 P.2d 330 (1974) · 7248 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed as to the denial of alimony; reversed and remanded as to child support for reconsideration and, absent an increase, a statement of the reasons.The court affirmed the denial of alimony and remanded on child support. Under NRS 125.170 and Sweeney v. Sweeney, 42 Nev. 431, 179 P. 638 (1919), a court lacks power to award or modify alimony after a final divorce…
ENGEBRETSON VS. ENGEBRETSON (DIVORCE)
Feb 11, 195773 Nev. 19, 307 P.2d 115 (1957) · 4001 · Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal dismissed. ("The appeal is dismissed with costs to respondent.")The wife moved to dismiss the husband's appeal from a January 24, 1956 'Order for Preliminary Allowances' awarding $300 preliminary counsel fees and $100 per month for support pending the litigation, without prejudice…
WISMAN VS. WISMAN (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Apr 9, 198096 Nev. 340, 608 P.2d 1110 (1980) · 10545 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.The Court (per curiam) reversed an order declining, for lack of power, to hear a motion to modify alimony. The 1974 divorce decree ordered the husband to pay $1,000 per month in alimony until the wife remarried, died,…
Every summary is independently verified against the source opinion; summaries are informational research aids, not legal advice, and no substitute for reading the decision. Topic groupings are derived automatically from each case’s category tag and cited statutes; a case may appear under two topics.