Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

LAURIE A. KUNSTEL, RESPONDENT v. DAVID W. KUNSTEL, JR., APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM

The parties' marriage was dissolved, and the court entered a judgment and decree on July 21, 1995. Subsequently, a motion for contempt was filed. At a hearing held on March 14, 1996, within one year of entry of the judgment, called on the motion for contempt, the parties sought to reopen the judgment to correct alleged errors in the judgment filed. The parties filed a stipulation on March 25, 1996. A new judgment was filed on April 11, 1996.

Finding the proceedings at the hearing on March 14, 1996, and the consequent stipulation filed by the parties on March 25, 1996, to constitute a motion under Rule 74.06, the judgment is affirmed.

This Court finding no error of law in this case and determining that an opinion would have no precedential value, the trial court's judgment is affirmed by this memorandum decision. Rule 84.16(b).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KUNSTEL v. KUNSTEL
(Jan 27, 1998)