Case Name: In the Matter of the Dissolution of the Marriage of CHANCE, Appellant, and CHANCE, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1973-06-18
Citations: 13 Or. App. 620
Docket Number: No. 71 4095
Parties: In the Matter of the Dissolution of the Marriage of CHANCE, Appellant, and CHANCE, Respondent.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Foley, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 13
Pages: 620–621

Head Matter:
Argued May 23,
affirmed June 18,
petition for rehearing denied July 11,
petition for review denied September 5, 1973
In the Matter of the Dissolution of the Marriage of CHANCE, Appellant, and CHANCE, Respondent.
(No. 71 4095)
510 P2d 1351
Robert L. Ackerman, Springfield, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Babcock & Ackerman, Springfield.
Howard E. Speer, Eugene, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Stephen R. Blixseth and Grildea, Speer & McGavic, P.C.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Foley, Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In the present dissolution proceeding of a 26- year marriage between parties 57 and 56, respectively, the sole issues are the division of property and the award of alimony.
The trial court awarded real property of a net value of approximately $30,000 to the husband but required that he pay $10,500 forthwith to the wife. Thus it could be said that he received approximately $19,500 as against her $10,500 as a result of this property division.
While the award of property was somewhat favorable to the husband, alimony of $100 per month was awarded to the wife, continuing until she "is 65 years of age and retires, the remarriage of [the wife], or until the death of either
We review de novo. Newman v. Newman, 8 Or App 220, 493 P2d 71, Sup Ct review denied (1972); Emery v. Emery, 5 Or App 133, 481 P2d 656, Sup Ct review denied (1971). From our review we find no reason to change the decree in any way.
Affirmed.