Court Opinion

ID: 9762117
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 02:10:57.35156+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:30.247641
License: Public Domain

Opinion by
Wright, J.,
Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part :
I agree with the majority that there was in this case a failure to demonstrate need. I would go further, *427however, and hold that the petition should have been summarily dismissed because it was not filed in time. The Williams case, relied upon by the majority, does not control the present situation. We were there concerned with an application for counsel fees covering services rendered in resisting a request for reduction in the amount of alimony after divorce a mensa et thoro. Our decision was expressly based upon continuing jurisdiction to modify the decree in such regard. In the case at bar, a decree of absolute divorce was entered, a rule to vacate was discharged, and the appeal period expired. Debet esse finis litium.
Hike and Woodside, JJ., join in this opinion.