Legal Opinion

Hardy v. Hardy

California Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1943No. L. A. 18463PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

On April 24, 1937, plaintiff Myrtle Hardy and defendant Oliver Hardy executed a property settlement agreement providing that defendant would pay $250 weekly for the support of plaintiff unless his income fell below $1,000 a week, in which case he would pay one-quarter of the amount he received. Plaintiff contends that defendant was bound to pay $250 weekly, regardless of his actual receipts in a particular week, if his income averaged over $1,000 a week. Defendant contends that in any week in which his receipts were less than $1,000, he was bound to pay only one-quarter of the amount actually…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Walsh v. WalshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Oil Well Supply Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Wineburgh v. GayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
  4. Talmadge v. ArrowHead Reservoir Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Sarina v. PedrottiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Desny v. WilderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Coyne v. KrempelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Bewick v. MechamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Larsen v. JohannesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

29 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