Opinion · Orlaw Oregon

SPICER and SPICER, 63 Or. App. 250 (1983)

662 P.2d 373

Type
Opinion
Court
Orlaw Oregon
Jurisdiction
Orlaw
Date
1983-07-19
Topic
general

SPICER and SPICER, 63 Or. App. 250 (1983) 662 P.2d 373 In the Matter of the Marriage of SPICER, Appellant, and SPICER, Respondent. D8011-69099; CA A24773Oregon Court of Appeals.Argued and submitted April 18, 1983 Affirmed as modified May 11, 1983Reconsideration denied June 24, petition for review denied July 19, 1983(295 Or. 446) Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Stephen B. Herrell, Judge. Brad Littlefield, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed SPICER and SPICER, 63 Or. App. 250 (1983). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

SPICER and SPICER,63 Or. App. 250(1983)
662 P.2d 373
In the Matter of the Marriage of SPICER,Appellant,and SPICER,Respondent.
D8011-69099; CA A24773
Oregon Court of Appeals.
Argued and submitted April 18, 1983
Affirmed as modified May 11, 1983
Reconsideration denied June 24, petition for review denied July 19, 1983
(295 Or. 446)
Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Stephen B. Herrell, Judge.
Brad Littlefield, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

George M. Galloway, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Stoel, Rives, Boley, Fraser Wyse, Portland.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed as modified. Costs to appellant.Page 251
PER CURIAM
This was a 34-year marriage. Wife, now 53, appeals from the dissolution decree, asking (1) an increase in the amount awarded to her as spousal support and (2) an increase in the amount awarded to her as attorney fees. Onde novoreview, we have determined that the first request is justified.

Paragraph 2 of the decree of dissolution is amended to read:
"2. Respondent shall pay petitioner permanent support in the amount of $1,400 per month."


Even with this adjustment, there will be a significant discrepancy between wife's standard of living, based on her probable future income, and what she would have enjoyed but for the dissolution; but the increase is in the amount she requested.

In all other respects, the decree is affirmed.

Affirmed as modified. Costs to appellant.Page 252