Case ID: or-app_54/html/0667-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted October 16,
    affirmed November 9, 1981,
    reconsideration denied January 14,
    petition for review denied February 10, 1982 (292 Or 568)
    In the Matter of the Marriage of JOHANSEN, Appellant, and JOHANSEN, Respondent.
    
    (No. 114,381, CA 18781)
    635 P2d 1030
    Jossi Davidson, Silverton, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
    Arthur B. Cummins, Jr., Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Rhoten, Rhoten & Speerstra, Salem.
    Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Warden and Warren, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

The only issue meriting consideration in this appeal is whether the trial court properly fixed child support under the standards in Smith v. Smith, 290 Or 675, 626 P2d 342 (1981). In the briefs and at oral argument the court was informed that there is now pending in the trial court a proceeding in respect to the support provisions of the decree. We therefore decline to exercise our power of de novo review.

Affirmed. Costs to respondent.