Burlew v. Burlew

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[w]hen deciding whether rehabilitation is possible, and, in general, determining the proper form and amount of alimony, courts must consider the ‘relevant factors’ set forth in section [36-5-121(i
• holding that unlike alimony in solido, alimony in futuro is subject to modification
• affirming the trial court’s award of alimony in solido of $220,000 to wife even though she was awarded 60.7% of the marital estate
• noting that alimony in futuro is “indefinite and modifiable”
• relying upon Waddey for definitions of the two kinds of alimony
• noting the indefinite nature of an alimony in future award

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).