¶1 I concur. However, I think it is not necessary for us to hold that the court could grant temporary alimony or support money, after the expenses for such support has been incurred, on the ground that the parties had stipulated to that effect. That question involves the same principles as *365 are involved in the question of whether the court may award attorney’s fees and costs of trial after those expenses have been incurred. Section 40-3-3, U. C. A. 1943, provides for both in the same words. The possibility of obtaining credit in both instances are the same and the necessity for support is just as urgent as for attorney’s fees. I think that all of the reasons given in the prevailing opinion in support of the second proposition are equally applicable to the first question. I, therefore, think we should base our decision on the question of alimony on those principles rather than base it on the stipulation.
111 Utah 353
179 P.2d 1005
Weiss v. Weiss
Decided May 2, 1947
Utah Supreme Court · decided 1947-05-02
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1947-05-02
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 2008
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →