Legal Opinion

Kohl v. Kohl

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 26, 1944No. Civ. 14405PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOX, J. pro tem.

Plaintiff and defendant, who were then husband and wife, entered into a property settlement agreement on June 4, 1941. In addition to providing that the wife should have custody of their two minor children and providing for their support, the parties also undertook to settle their own property rights. The provisions in the agreement for the support of the children are not involved in this litigation and such provisions are therefore omitted from this opinion.

In its preliminary provisions the agreement recognizes that the parties were then living separate and apart. It goes on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Puckett v. PuckettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Sears Ettlinger v. EttlingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Tolle v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Long v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Parker v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Dexter v. DexterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Ryker v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
  3. Hamilton v. HamiltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  4. Lane v. LaneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Van Dyke v. Van DykeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

8 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