Legal Opinion

Sears Ettlinger v. Ettlinger

California Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1935No. S. F. 14982PublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, C. J.

In February, 1928, the plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant for separate maintenance. Defendant’s assets at the time were valued at approximately $265,000. On March 20, 1929, during the pendency of the action, the parties entered into a written agreement looking to the adjustment and settlement of their property rights. No question of fraud in the procurement or execution of this agreement is raised. Its provisions will be referred to hereinafter. Subsequently, and, as plaintiff contends, in consideration of the execution of this agreement, she agreed to, and did, change the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cohen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Atlass v. AtlassCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Hogarty v. HogartyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Armstrong v. ArmstrongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
  5. Wallace v. WallaceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. Barham v. BarhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Hough v. HoughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Adams v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Puckett v. PuckettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Dexter v. DexterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954

53 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