Legal Opinion

Reynolds v. Reynolds

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 5, 1936No. Civ. 1906PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MUNDO, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff wife in a divorce action, wherein the respondent was joined as claiming part of the community property.

James Reynolds, a married man, was appointed referee in a condemnation suit. His fee for such services was allowed in the sum of $1560. Upon an action for divorce being filed by his wife, and before he had completed his work as referee, Reynolds assigned his fee to the respondent Lottie V. Weathers for $400 cash and the cancellation of a note for $100. His wife did not consent to the assignment. As between Reynolds and his wife the court…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Matter of StrykerNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  2. Kirkwood v. SotoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Crawford v. BradfordSupreme Court of Florida · 1887
  4. Martin v. County of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Berg v. Standard Light Co. of Cal.California Court of Appeal · 1928

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Earhart v. FrohmillerArizona Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Otten v. University HospitalsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  3. Lande v. JurisichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Fitch v. Pacific Fidelity Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. United States v. GerdelDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1952

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API