Legal Opinion

Fairchild v. Fairchild

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 6, 1948No. Civ. 16407PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

The two appeals herein are effectually from the same order: one from the minute entry of the court’s decision; the other from the documentary order modifying the interlocutory judgment of divorce which had been previously entered. Pursuant to a stipulation made then in open court the movable properties and money of the parties were apportioned by the decree. That document provided: “It is further ordered . . . that the following described real property . . . shall hereby be held in joint tenancy by the parties hereto subject to partition by further order of the court herein; the of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hough v. HoughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Baxter v. BaxterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. Hogarty v. HogartyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Wylie v. WylieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Schell v. SchellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hansen v. HansenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. Barba v. BarbaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  3. Johnson v. LowarySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Barry v. BarryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Hansen v. HansenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

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