From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dobson v. Dobson

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Dec 13, 1943
320 Ill. App. 687 (Ill. App. Ct. 1943)

Opinion

Gen. No. 42,678. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed December 13, 1943 Rehearing denied December 28, 1943

DIVORCE, § 226propriety of amount of attorneys' fees allowed against husband found guilty of contempt in matter of alimony. Decree finding husband guilty of contempt in failing to pay for period of some 11 years monthly instalments of alimony provided for in divorce decree, and liable, in sum originally fixed, for attorneys' fees for wife's prosecution of rule to show cause, held proper, notwithstanding wife's marriage to another and her foreclosure of mortgage securing such deferred instalments and payment by husband of unpaid balance of alimony secured by such mortgage, together with interest, and costs and attorneys' fees connected with foreclosure proceedings.

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. PHILIP J. FINNEGAN, Judge, presiding.

Decree of October 20, 1942 reversed; decree of April 19, 1942 affirmed. Heard in the first division, first district, this court at the June term, 1943.

J. Edward Jones, for appellant and cross appellee;

Norman C. Barry and Francis L. Brinkman, for appellee and cross appellant.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed December 13, 1943; rehearing denied December 28, 1943.


Summaries of

Dobson v. Dobson

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Dec 13, 1943
320 Ill. App. 687 (Ill. App. Ct. 1943)
Case details for

Dobson v. Dobson

Case Details

Full title:Lucy W. Dobson, Appellant and Cross Appellee, v. Robert B. Dobson…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Dec 13, 1943

Citations

320 Ill. App. 687 (Ill. App. Ct. 1943)
51 N.E.2d 1010

Citing Cases

In re Marriage of Ramos

We need not decide here whether we agree with the fifth district's reasoning in Fox, for we note that it…

Austad v. Austad

This distinction is also suggested in the Oklahoma case of Gilcrease v. Gilcrease. Dobson v. Dobson, 320 Ill.…