{"issue_text":"Whether respondent should be given further indulgence beyond 3 months to pay","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Respondent has had over 2 years since 2009 order"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The parties had a 2009 consent order requiring the respondent to pay 50% of assessed value of improvements on a property. After evaluation, respondent failed to pay and offered installment payments over 12 months, which applicant rejected. Applicant later accepted 3-month payment period with sale of property if unpaid.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases