Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Alimony (6)
- Spousal support (6)
- Child support (3)
- Permanent Alimony (3)
- Guardianship of minor child (2)
-
- Permanent alimony (2)
- Alimony, spousal support (1)
- Annulment (1)
- Antenuptial Agreements (1)
- Dissolution of marriage (1)
- Division of property (1)
- Effect of Divorce Decree (1)
- Estoppel (1)
- Foreign Divorces (1)
- Heirship Proceedings (1)
- Limitations and Laches (1)
- Modification of Allowance (1)
- New Trial (1)
- Property settlement agreements (1)
- Protection of Marriage Relation (1)
- Remittitur (1)
- Spousal maintenance (1)
- Void Marriage (1)
Articles 1 - 21 of 21
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Spellens V. Spellens, Jesse W. Carter
Spellens V. Spellens, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where a husband duped his wife into believing that her divorce from her previous husband was final at the time of their marriage, the trial court erred in finding that that the husband was not estopped from denying the marriage.
Hilton V. Mcnitt, Jesse W. Carter
Hilton V. Mcnitt, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
As the property settlement and divorce decree provided that the decedent was to pay the claimant a finite series of monthly support payments, the executor properly denied the claimant's demand for payments that accrued after the decedent's death.
Cooper V. Cooper, Jesse W. Carter
Cooper V. Cooper, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Settlement agreement that provided for decedent to name former spouse as life insurance beneficiary terminated with divorce decree, and decedent's obligation to support former spouse ended with former spouse's remarriage.
Plumer V. Plumer [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Plumer V. Plumer [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The trial court improperly dismissed the former husband's application for a modification of the divorce decree, as the parties' agreement was integrated and expressly provided for the modification of the trial court's support orders.
Bratnober V. Bratnober [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Bratnober V. Bratnober [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Wife's appeal from her divorce decree's alimony and child support levels was rejected; although the levels were reduced from the interlocutory levels, the husband's future finances were such that the lower levels of support were appropriate.
Herda V. Herda [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Herda V. Herda [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Termination of an ex-husband's support obligations to his ex-wife and to his children was appropriate because the ex-wife had remarried and the parties' children had reached the age of majority.
Anderson V. Mart [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Anderson V. Mart [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A divorced wife was entitled to recover support payments from the estate of her former husband. Alimony payments agreed to as an inseparable part of a property settlement did not terminate on the death of the husband.
Foust V. Foust [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Foust V. Foust [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Because the conclusion that the parties intended a separation agreement to be merged in an annulment decree was inescapable, the wife's writ of execution upon the husband's property for failure to make support payments was proper.
Woods V. Security-First Nat'l Bank, Jesse W. Carter
Woods V. Security-First Nat'l Bank, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where plaintiff alleged that defendants were not entitled to distribution because the deceased made an oral agreement with plaintiff, plaintiff was entitled to one-half of the deceased's property based on res judicata.
Messenger V. Messenger [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Messenger V. Messenger [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Provisions for monthly support payments to a former wife were not subject to modification because they were an integral and inseparable part of the property settlement agreement that was incorporated by reference into the divorce decree.
Hall V. Superior Court Of Los Angeles County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Hall V. Superior Court Of Los Angeles County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A husband's request for a writ of mandamus to compel a court to fix the amount of permanent alimony he must pay to his wife, who was receiving temporary alimony, was improper and the request was denied.
Shore V. Shore [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Shore V. Shore [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Ex-husband was not entitled to have title to undivided one-half interest in real and personal property in ex-wife's possession established and for partition of personal property when issues had already been adjudicated in annulment proceeding.
County Of Contra Costa V. Lasky, Jesse W. Carter
County Of Contra Costa V. Lasky, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Daughter's sole income was what she received from her former husband for support of herself and child. Thus, alimony should not have been considered in determining her ability to support her mother, and she was not liable for such support.
Guardianship Of Kawakita [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Guardianship Of Kawakita [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
An appeal of a trial court's refusal to annul the appointment of a guardian was improperly brought because the refusal was not an appealable order under the California Probate Code.
Guardianship Of Smith, Jesse W. Carter
Guardianship Of Smith, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The fact that the minor children were not the legitimate issue of the natural father was not a significant factor in appointing him guardian because he was found to be fit, and the mother was deceased.
Dexter V. Dexter [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Dexter V. Dexter [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The wife secured the approval of a separation agreement by the trial court, and after accepting the benefits thereof, she could not seek relief inconsistent with its terms by attempting to modify the monthly payments.
Fox V. Fox [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Fox V. Fox [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
It was error to award an ex-wife an increase in alimony and attorney fees under a divorce decree where the alimony provisions of the decree were an integral part of the ex-wife's property settlement agreement with her ex-husband.
Flynn V. Flynn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Flynn V. Flynn [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Court had continuing jurisdiction to modify support payments even though the separation agreement was only incorporated by reference into the final decree of dissolution. Changed circumstances were not shown to warrant modification.
Dietrich V. Dietrich [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Dietrich V. Dietrich [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Because a husband was aware that his wife's divorce from a previous husband was of questionable validity, the husband was estopped from denying the validity of the divorce in the wife's action for separate maintenance.
Smith V. Smith [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Smith V. Smith [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In divorce proceedings, when a wife was awarded nominal alimony despite the waiver of support in the property agreement, the trial court in effect reserved jurisdiction to award substantial alimony if changed circumstances justified an award.
Schumm V. Berg, Jesse W. Carter
Schumm V. Berg, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A contract between a mother and father for the support of an illegitimate child, premised on the mother's promises not to bring a paternity action and to name the child after the father, was enforceable by the minor against the father's estate.