Earp v. Earp
California Court of Appeal
231 Cal. App. 3d 1008 (1991)
Kenneth Earp (plaintiff) and Doris Earp (defendant) got divorced. As part of the divorce settlement, Kenneth owed Doris approximately $700,000. Doris held a writ of execution over a mobile home park Kenneth owned, which would allow her to force a sale to satisfy Kenneth’s debt to her. Doris agreed to withdraw her writ in exchange for an adequate security for her debt. To provide that security, Kenneth and Doris negotiated a lease of the mobile home park. Pursuant to the terms of the lease, Doris took possession of the park, operated it, paid its operating expenses, and collected the tenants’ rents in a reserve fund. The lease agreement contained a term providing that any excess left in the reserve fund after paying the park’s expenses at the end of each year would become Doris’s property. The lease agreement further provided that Kenneth could pay his $700,000 debt by a certain date to terminate the lease. If Kenneth missed that deadline, Doris had the option to forgive Kenneth’s debt as a means to purchase the mobile home park. The market value of the mobile home park was approximately $5 million. Kenneth repaid the $700,000 by the deadline and retook possession of the mobile home park. At that time, the reserve fund had approximately $200,000 in accumulated funds from previous calendar years. Doris claimed the excess funds as her own under the lease agreement. Kenneth sued to recover the excess funds. The trial court ruled in favor of Kenneth, holding that the purported lease was actually a mortgage. Because mortgagees in possession of property were not entitled to profits in excess of the debt, the court held, Doris could not retain the excess funds. Doris appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (King, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 684,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 684,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 42,800 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.