of developing any highway safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data. 24 . Id. (emphasis added). 25 . We do not suggest that the superior courl lacked the equitable authority to provide relief for any perceived disadvantage to Walden in learning shortly before trial that evidence she planned to rely on was inadmissible as a result of federal law. The court had such authority. See Hecht Co. v. Bowles, 321 U.S. 321, 329-30, 64 S.Ct. 587, 88 LEd. 754 (1944) (<HOLDING>). - But the court was not required to take
holding that if the market value of an asset can be ascertained the decree should account for the change in value between the date of the decree and the timely execution of the distribution plan in the decree the distribution based on value at the distribution date recognizing distinctions between public and private areas holding that custody should not be changed unless conditions have altered since the decree was rendered or material facts existed at the time of the decree but were unknown to the court and then only for the welfare of the child holding trial courts have equitable authority to mould each decree to the necessities of the particular case and to allow for nice adjustment and reconciliation between the public interest and private needs recognizing that questions of changed conditions and the amount of child support must be resolved on the particular facts of each case