In re the Marriage of Katare

Supreme Court of Washington · Decided 2012-08-16

Cited by 226 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Chambers, J. ¶39 (concurring) — I substantially concur with the majority. However, I respectfully disagree with its conclusion that Brajesh Katare’s conduct has not crossed the line to intransigence. Because I conclude it has crossed that line, I would grant Lynette Katare’s request for attorney fees. See In re Marriage of Greenlee, <a href="/opinion/1423935/in-the-matter-of-mar…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.