Huhn v. Huhn
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., May 5, 1980 385 So. 2d 423
Huhn v. Huhn, 349 So. 2d 980 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977).
Cited by
Explained in 1
- In Re: C.W.B. and D.A.L.B. Applying for the Adoption of R.M.G.B. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
- Warren v. Southern Energy Homes, Inc. 771 So. 2d 214 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
- Carr v. City of New Orleans 622 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
- Daniel v. Daniel 548 So. 2d 44 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
- Ducote v. Smith 527 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
- Thibodeaux v. Western World Insurance 387 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
- Pepitone v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 365 So. 2d 1195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
- Morgan City Bank & Trust Co. v. Jambois O & M Machine Shop, Inc. 367 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Opinion text
BOLIN, Judge. Mr. and Mrs. Huhn were divorced in February 1972, and the wife was awarded alimony in the sum of $210 per month. Mr. Huhn filed the present rule against his former wife seeking a reduction in the alimony payments, primarily claiming she was employed in Alaska making a substantial monthly salary. The trial judge found Mrs. Huhn was employed at the time of the divorce and that Mr. Huhn had failed to prove any changed conditions or that Mrs. Huhn had sufficient means for her support. From judgment rejecting the demands of plaintiff in rule, he appeals. We find the evidence supports the trial court’s judgment, and it is affirmed at appellant’s cost.