Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Marriage of Manfer

California Court of Appeal
144 Cal. App. 4th 925 (2006)


Facts

Maureen (defendant) and Samuel (plaintiff) Manfer were married on June 16, 1973. In June 2004, after a disagreement with Maureen, Samuel moved out of the family home and into an apartment. Concerned about how their children would process the separation, Samuel and Maureen agreed to keep their separation quiet through the holidays. Samuel and Maureen attended a few social events together and went on some trips together; however, the couple maintained separate finances, did not engage in sexual relations, and did not support each other during the separation. At the beginning of 2005, Samuel and Maureen announced their separation. Samuel filed for divorce in April 2005 and alleged that the date of separation was March 15, 2005. Maureen countered that the date of separation was July 1, 2004, shortly after Samuel had moved out of the family home in June 2004. The trial court, applying an objective standard, determined that the date of separation was March 15, 2005. The trial court reasoned that the date of separation is determined by looking at whether the public would believe the parties were separated. Maureen appealed the trial court’s decision on the issue of the appropriate date of separation.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Ikola, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 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.

  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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 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.