Court Opinion

ID: 9545187
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:08:02.663497+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:14:16.579776
License: Public Domain

RICHARDSON, J.
I concur in the judgment. I respectfully note, however, that the holding in In re Marriage of Lopez (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 93 [113 Cal.Rptr. 58], in which I concurred, neither favors “termination of jurisdiction over spousal support for the sole purpose of curtailing the number of future modification hearings” (ante, p. 450) nor promotes spousal self-sufficiency without regard to the realistic financial capabilities of the parties. On the contrary, the Lopez court determined that, given the facts of that case, the trial court had abused its discretion as to the amount and duration of spousal support ordered and accordingly reversed a judgment as to that award. In my view, the holding in Lopez does not contain language inconsistent with the broad policy expressions set forth herein and disapproval of Lopez is not, therefore, required.
Respondent’s petition for a rehearing was denied February 15, 1978, and the opinion was modified to read as printed above.