Supreme Court of California
544 P.2d 561 (1976)
Gloria Brown (plaintiff) and Robert Brown (defendant) were a married couple who separated in 1973. Mr. Brown currently has a nonvested pension from his employer to which Ms. Brown claimed a portion during their divorce proceeding in superior court. The superior court determined that the rule regarding pensions as stated in French v. French, 112 P.2d 235, applied, and thus Mr. Brown’s pension should only be considered as an expectancy, not a property interest. Accordingly, the court ruled that Mr. Brown’s nonvested pension did not qualify as a property interest, therefore, it was not community property that could be distributed upon the parties’ divorce. Ms. Brown petitioned for certiorari to the Supreme Court of California.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Tobriner, 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 241,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.