Estate of Hafner
Court of Appeal of California
229 Cal. Rptr. 676 , 184 Cal. App. 3d 1371 (1986)
- Written by Jacqueline (Hagan) Doyer, JD
Facts
Joan and Charles Hafner were married in 1954 in New York. Joan and Charles had three daughters together: Catherine, Lillian, and Dorothy. Joan and Charles finally separated in 1957. The last time Joan saw Charles was in 1958 at a hearing regarding child support. Neither Joan nor Charles ever filed for divorce from the other. In 1962, Charles and Helen Hafner met. Charles told Helen he had divorced his wife Joan and that he did not have to pay child support, because he gave up his interest in a home. On October 14, 1963, Helen and Charles went through a marriage ceremony in Las Vegas. Helen and Charles lived as husband and wife from that point forward. The couple had a daughter named Kimberly in 1964. In 1973, Charles was injured in an accident. Charles was unable to work due to severe injuries and brain damage. Charles received $600,000 from a personal-injury settlement from the accident in 1975. Charles died intestate on December 25, 1982. Charles’s estate was valued at $416,472.40, the remainder of his personal-injury settlement. Helen (plaintiff) filed a petition in probate court to determine if there were any other individuals with a claim to Charles’s estate. Joan and her daughters (defendants) filed a response detailing their claims against Charles’s estate. Kimberly also filed a statement of interest in the estate. The trial court awarded Charles’s entire estate to Helen as Charles’s putative spouse. Joan, her daughters, and Kimberly appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Danielson, J.)
Dissent (Lui, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
