HEINLE v. HEINLE

No. 6861.

502 P.2d 986 (1972)

Richard E. HEINLE, Appellant, v. Lyann Aileen HEINLE, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Nevada.

November 16, 1972.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Fry & Fry, Reno, for appellant.

Samuel B. Francovich, Reno, for respondent.


OPINION

PER CURIAM.

In the circumstances disclosed by the record, we believe the trial court erred neither in its disposition of the parties' community property, NRS 125.150(1), nor in ordering appellant to pay respondent $75 per month for the support of the parties' minor daughter, NRS 125.140(2). Recounting those circumstances, which in combination are unique, would create no useful precedent.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases