Legal Opinion

In re the Meretricious Relationship of Long

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 14, 2010No. 28377-1-IIIPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

¶1 Dr. David R. Fregeau appeals the trial court’s equitable property division to Jeremy R. Long and the meretricious relationship determination from which it flowed. The parties use different, sometimes confusing terms to describe their relationship. Our Supreme Court has noted “meretricious” carries negative and derogatory connotations and has chosen to substitute “committed intimate relationship” for meretricious relationship. Olver v. Fowler, 161 Wn.2d 655, 657 n.1, 168 P.3d 348 (2007). Intimacy and commitment are just two nonexclusive relevant factors a trial court can consider in…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Connell v. FranciscoWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2006
  3. In Re the Marriage of LindseyWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. In re PenningtonWashington Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Walters v. ParrottSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2013
  2. In re the Domestic Partnership of WalshCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  3. Serres v. Department of Retirement SystemsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  4. Charles M. Mcbeth v. Ruby E. KetschauCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  5. Gelsey Hanson v. Zachary HarjoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015

5 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