In re the Marriage of O'Connell
California Court of Appeal
8 Cal. App. 4th 565, 10 Cal. Rptr. 2d 334 (1992)
John O’Connell divorced his spouse, Raytha, in 1986. The same year, John married another woman, Nona, and John then named Nona as the beneficiary of his life-insurance policies. The following year, the divorce court entered a property and support order on John’s divorce from Raytha. The judgment required John to pay spousal support and to pay child support for two minor children. The judgment did not address John’s life insurance, but the court reserved jurisdiction over remaining issues. About three years later, in 1990, John was disabled, and he filed a motion for reduction of child and spousal support. In response, Raytha informally offered to accept reductions in support if John named Raytha, or Raytha and the children, as his life-insurance beneficiaries. The divorce court held a hearing on John’s motion. John did not attend the hearing because of illness. At the hearing, John’s counsel objected to any modification of the life insurance, arguing that a modification would be inappropriate on two grounds: Raytha had not filed a formal response to John’s motion; and modification would be unfair to Nona. The divorce court rejected counsel’s argument, reduced the support obligations, and ordered John to add Raytha and the remaining minor child as beneficiaries on John’s life insurance. John died in late 1990 without changing the beneficiaries on his policies. Raytha filed a motion in the divorce court to enforce the order regarding the life-insurance beneficiaries; Nona filed a countermotion to vacate the same order. The divorce court ruled in favor of Raytha. Nona appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Cottle, 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 724,000 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 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.