From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heston v. Heston

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Jan 6, 1967
423 P.2d 437 (Haw. 1967)

Opinion

No. 4502.

January 6, 1967.

APPEAL FROM FIRST CIRCUIT COURT, HON. A.R. HAWKINS, JUDGE.

RICHARDSON, C.J., CASSIDY, WIRTZ, LEWIS AND MIZUHA, JJ.

John E. Parks, attorney for Libellant, Cross-Libellee, Appellant.

Gene A. Trini, attorney for Libellee, Cross-Libellant, Appellee.


Appellant-wife was granted a divorce from appellee-husband by the trial court. From a total estate of $28,982.41, appellant was awarded a property settlement of $11,463.79. In addition, the court awarded appellant alimony amounting to $9,100.00 payable every two weeks at the rate of $175.00 per payment for a period of two years.

The only issue involved in this appeal is whether under all the facts in this case, the trial court erred in limiting the award of alimony to the appellant for a period of two years. Upon a review of the record, the briefs submitted, and the argument of counsel at the hearing before this court, we are of the opinion that this appeal is manifestly without merit. No abuse of discretion has been shown on the part of the trial judge in limiting the award of alimony to a period of two years. Tanguay v. Tanguay, 41 Haw. 345-348; Nobrega v. Nobrega, 14 Haw. 152. See also Richards v. Richards, 44 Haw. 491, 355 P.2d 188; Crow v. Crow, 49 Haw. 258, 414 P.2d 82.

Judgment is affirmed, and appellant's request for attorney's fees and costs is denied in the exercise of our discretion.


Summaries of

Heston v. Heston

Supreme Court of Hawaii
Jan 6, 1967
423 P.2d 437 (Haw. 1967)
Case details for

Heston v. Heston

Case Details

Full title:KAZUKO G. HESTON v. FRANCIS E. HESTON

Court:Supreme Court of Hawaii

Date published: Jan 6, 1967

Citations

423 P.2d 437 (Haw. 1967)
423 P.2d 437

Citing Cases

In re Jane Doe

The conclusion is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard of review. Heston v. Heston, 49 Haw. 521,…

In re as

The conclusion is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard of review. Heston v. Heston, 49 Haw. 521,…