Legal Opinion
Esserman v. Esserman
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 15, 1982No. Civ. 61914PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLEIN, P. J.
Appellant Jack Esserman (Jack) appeals from the dismissal of his order to show cause (OSC) re modification of interlocutory judgment.
The trial court held that an October 14, 1959, property settlement agreement was approved and incorporated into the interlocutory judgment of divorce on December 15, 1959, (1959 agreement) and as such was binding on the parties and the trial court. The trial court further ruled that a compromise agreement between the parties dated December 29, 1970, did not render the support provisions contained in said judgment of divorce modifiable.
For…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Adams v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Graham v. GrahamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. All Parties and PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- In Re Marriage of NielsenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Fukuzaki v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re Marriage of HuffordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- In Re Marriage of SegelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Forcum v. ForcumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Maytag v. MaytagCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Sege v. SegelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986