Bahr v. Bahr

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• failure of trial court to explain reason for $1,500 per month maintenance award left supreme court with a nagging question as to its appropriateness
• failure of trial court to explain reason for $1,500 per month maintenance award left supreme court with a nagging question as to its appropriateness
• “We are left with a nagging question: Why is $1,500 per month a proper maintenance award under the facts and circumstances of this case based upon these recited factors?”
• decisions on property division and maintenance “are closely related” and “cannot be made in a vacuum,” and, therefore, “a substantial error in the property division necessitate[s] reconsideration of the maintenance award”
• “It would seem reasonable for the trial court to begin the maintenance evaluation with the proposition that the dependent partner may be entitled to 50 percent of the total earnings of both parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).