In re Marriage of Cauley

41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 902, 138 Cal. App. 4th 1100 (2006)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Marriage of Cauley

California Court of Appeal
41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 902, 138 Cal. App. 4th 1100 (2006)

  • Written by Haley Gintis, JD

Facts

In November 2002, Gerald Cauley (plaintiff) petitioned for divorce from Eileen Cauley (defendant). In March 2003, Gerald obtained a temporary restraining order against Eileen after she had made continuous calls threatening his life and had physically attacked him. In August 2003, the divorce decree was entered. The decree contained a spousal-support provision providing that Gerald owed Eileen monthly support, which could not be modified unless Eileen began cohabitating with a partner or Gerald lost his job. Following the divorce decree, Gerald agreed not to pursue a more permanent restraining order and moved from California to Florida with his new girlfriend. Shortly after the decree was entered, Eileen traveled to Florida. While in Florida, Eileen damaged Gerald’s property and physically attacked Gerald and his girlfriend. Following the incident, Gerald obtained a one-year restraining order against Eileen from a trial court in Florida. Eileen traveled back to California after the incident, but continuously violated the order by calling Gerald over 1,000 times and leaving threatening messages. In response, Eileen was charged by a Florida prosecutor and pleaded guilty to felony aggravated stalking. Eileen was placed on probation. Additionally, Gerald obtained a restraining order against Eileen from a California court and petitioned the California court to release him from his spousal-support obligations. The California court ordered a temporary cessation of the support obligation pursuant to California Family Code § 4325 (1992) and scheduled a hearing for Eileen to introduce evidence supporting her position that the spousal-support payments continue. Eileen argued that Section 4235, which would allow Gerald to stop making payments because of Eileen’s criminal conviction, could not apply because the parties had agreed that spousal support would not be modified unless Eileen began cohabitating with a partner or Gerald lost his job. The trial court rejected Eileen’s argument and granted Gerald’s motion. Eileen appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Mihara, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 741,000 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
  2. 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 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership