of fact without a jury, whether by equitable or ordinary proceedings, shall find the facts in writing, separately stating its conclusions of law, and direct an appropriate judgment.” 2 . Michael also relies on the court's comments made at the end of the hearing upon learning that a dissolution action had been filed. The court stated, "I will enter an order in the divorce action that the parties have no contact. I will not make a finding of domestic abuse....” Michael claims the court’s oral statement constitutes a "finding of fact” that there was no domestic abuse. Rule 179(a), however, requires that the court make written findings of fact. Thus, the court's oral remarks do not satisfy the requirement for written findings. Cf. Wright v. Heizer Corp., 560 F.2d 236, 246 (7th Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>); Montgomery v. Wadsworth Plumbing & Heating
holding that trial courts limited findings were insufficient to allow determination of whether trial court abused its discretion in denying defendants motion to dismiss his indictment on constitutional speedy trial grounds holding remarks made by the trial court in denying a motion to dismiss which were not included in the courts published opinion could not be treated as findings of fact holding that although trial courts oral opinion may be used as a reference in the interpretation of its written findings of fact it is not a finding of fact holding because defendant does not argue in his brief that these findings of fact are not supported by    evidence in the record this court is bound by the trial courts findings of fact holding that motion to dismiss cannot be treated as summary judgment