Summary
In Gaynor v. Hird, No. 1113-93-4 (Va.Ct.App. Apr. 26, 1994), we ruled that there was no merit to Gaynor's claim that the trial court erred in bifurcating the settlement of the allotment from the accounting of rent she was due.
Summary of this case from HIRD v. GAYNOROpinion
Record No. 1113-93-4
April 26, 1994
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY PAUL F. SHERIDAN, JUDGE
Edward V. O'Connor, Jr., (Lewis, Dack, Paradiso, O'Connor Good, on briefs), for appellant.
William B. Cummings, for appellee.
Present: Chief Judge Moon, Judges Willis and Elder
Argued at Alexandria, Virginia
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.
Pursuant to Rule 5A:27, the judgment is affirmed for the following reasons:
(1) There is no merit to appellant's claim that the trial judge erred in bifurcating the settlement of the allotment from the accounting for rent required by this Court's opinion,Gaynor v. Hird, 15 Va. App. 379, 424 S.E.2d 240 (1992). The trial court's action did not operate to deprive Mrs. Hird of an accounting for rent to which she is entitled.
(2) The appeal of the provisions pertaining to sanctions is moot.
Affirmed.