Deitz v. Deitz
Citations
- 2017 Ohio 8354
- 99 N.E.3d 997
Syllabus
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding defendant-appellant in contempt of court for failing to provide plaintiff-appellee the dependency-exemption form. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding plaintiff-appellee attorney fees associated with the contempt finding. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by reallocating the dependency exemption. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant-appellant's motion for attorney fees because she failed to voluntarily dismiss the motion under Civ.R. 41(A).
Judges: Preston
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- State ex rel. Ventrone v. BirkelOhio Supreme Court· 1981-03-11· cited 292×
- Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. ReidOhio Supreme Court· 1999-04-07· cited 101×
- Infinite Security Solutions, L.L.C. v. Karam Properties II, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court· 2015-03-26· cited 61×
- Roush v. RoushOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-03-09· cited 15×
- Walton v. WaltonOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-06-13· cited 11×
- Serra v. SerraOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-03-10· cited 10×
- Lundy v. LundyOhio Court of Appeals· 2013-08-19· cited 8×
- Deitz v. DeitzOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-01-17· cited 6×
- Carr-Woodard v. WoodardOhio Court of Appeals· 2016-07-28· cited 5×
- Lawrence v. McCrawOhio Court of Appeals· 2011-12-12· cited 3×
- Greathouse v. HilliardOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-05-03· cited 3×
- Rhea v. RheaOhio Court of Appeals· 2017-06-06· cited 3×
- Freed v. FreedOhio Court of Appeals· 2015-11-02· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.