Skip to main content

Wilson v. Wilson

Citations

  • 349 N.E.2d 277
  • 169 Ind. App. 530
  • 1976 Ind. App. LEXIS 947

How courts have described this case

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

  • petition for interpretation of judgment to determine extent of obligation for attorney fees could properly be considered under Trial Rule 60(B)(7) or Trial Rule 13(M)
  • court may entertain action outside ninety-day period where party sought only to determine meaning of judgment and whether he had fully complied with its mandates
  • the fact that a party filed a “petition” rather than a “motion,” as it is called by T.R. 60(B), is not controlling; a motion is just an application to a court for an order particularly describing the relief sought and the grounds therefor

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lowdermilk, Robertson, Lybrook

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.