Marriage of Heikes
California Supreme Court
899 P.2d 1349 (1995)
- Written by Maggy Gregory, JD
Facts
Norman Heikes (plaintiff) and Rose Heikes (defendant) were married when, in 1976, Norman conveyed two parcels of property to himself and Rose as joint tenants. In 1984, the California legislature enacted § 4800.2, which held that, upon divorce, a spouse must be reimbursed for his or her contribution of separate property to the purchase of community property, unless the right to reimbursement is waived in writing. In 1986, the legislature enacted § 4800.1, which provided that the provisions of § 4800.2 would apply to any divorce proceedings filed after January 1, 1984, regardless of when the contribution to community property had occurred, unless the right to reimbursement was waived in writing by the contributing party. In 1990, divorce proceedings between Norman and Rose began, and a judgment of divorce entered in 1992 held both the marital home and the lot to be community property. Days after judgment, In re Marriage of Hilke, 841 P.2d 891 (1992), was decided. Hilke held the presumption that property acquired during marriage is community property retroactively applicable. In response, Norman moved for a new trial. Rose petitioned the California Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Werdegar, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.
