Legal Opinion

In Re the Marriage of Zale

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1999No. CV-97-0287-PRPublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EHRLICH, J. *

¶ 1 We granted review to answer the question whether a court may consider evidence extrinsic to the record to resolve the meaning of a judgment. We hold that the parol evidence rule does not apply to a judgment. For this and other reasons discussed below, the trial court and the court of appeals erred in concluding that the decree of dissolution established a fixed-term award. We thus remand this case for further proceedings with regard to the award and the payment of spousal maintenance.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2 In 1986, ten years after Bonnie and Mike Zale were…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Fayerweather v. RitchSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  3. Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1993
  4. People v. TippettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  5. Polk v. KoernerArizona Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. DRK PhotoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2018
  2. Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  3. Marriage of Bell-Kilbourn v. Bell-KilbournCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. In re the Marriage of JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  5. State Ex Rel. Department of Economic Security v. WaldrenArizona Supreme Court · 2007

14 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