In re the Marriage of Langham
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
f 1 Margo R. Langham (Margo) petitions from an adverse ruling in the Court of Appeals, holding that stock options are not converted until they are exercised and the resulting stock is sold. We hold that stock options, as valuable property distinct from stock, are converted when exercised. Damages are to be calculated at that date.
Sanders, J.
*556¶2 Velle J. Kolde (Velle) cross-petitions, seeking our determination that there is a binding stipulation between the parties. This stipulation would moot the remaining issues by giving Velle ownership of the disputed stock options long before he exercised…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Smith v. Skagit CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1969
- In re the Marriage of RideoutWashington Supreme Court · 2003
- In Re Marriage of RideoutWashington Supreme Court · 2003
- Poggi v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Jannot v. JannotWashington Supreme Court · 2003
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Potter v. Washington State PatrolWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Potter v. Washington State PatrolWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- In Re Checking Account Overdraft LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2010
- In Re Marriage of LanghamWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- United States v. F. Lee BaileyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.