Court Opinion

ID: 9630416
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:10:43.374369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:01.889360
License: Public Domain

REILLY, Chief Judge
(concurring specially) :
In view of the movant’s financial condition, I tend to agree that the trial court might have alleviated part of the financial *453hardship under the discretion vested in it by the second sentence of Super.Ct.Dom. Rel.R. 4(j) by dispensing with publication in a second newspaper. I take it that if the court had issued an order requiring publication only in The Washington Law Reporter, the periodical specified in Rule 4(j), we would recognize that such an order was well within the scope of its discretion as the difference in cost between publication in the Reporter and the paper preferred by the movant was only $7.50. No showing was made of inability to pay this difference.