Henriquez v. Henriquez

How courts have described this case

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

• construing Family Law Article § 12-103 to be in harmony with sections 7-107, 8-214, and 11-110 to avoid an “illogical result”
• observing that “court may neither add nor delete language so as to reflect an intent not evidenced in the plain and unambiguous language of the statute; nor may it construe the statute with forced or subtle interpretations that limit or extend its application”
• awarding fees under statute similar to A.R.S. § 25-324 and collecting cases
• upholding the Circuit Court’s award of attorneys’ fees to Mrs. Henriquez because the court “engaged in balancing under Section 12-103, finding that Mrs. Henriquez was ‘wholly dependent’ and ‘virtually penniless,’ warranting an award of attorneys’ fees, given Mr. Henriquez’s financial ability”
• “[w]e will not . . . judicially insert language [into a statute] to impose exceptions, limitations, or restrictions not set forth by the legislature”
• “[w]e will not . . . judicially insert language [into a statute] to impose exceptions, limitations, or restrictions not set forth by the legislature”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).