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

Marriage of Stallworth

Court of Appeal of California
192 Cal. App. 3d 742 (1987)


Facts

William (plaintiff) and Carol (defendant) Stallworth were married. The Stallworths had one child: Robert Stallworth. In February 1984, William filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. The case went to trial in April 1985. The Stallworths owned a family home that was considered community property. At trial, evidence was presented that Robert was being treated by a psychiatrist, enrolled in special education, and attending special reading classes. Carol testified she could not find a home in the same district at a similar price to what Carol was paying for the Stallworth home. There was no evidence regarding the cost of comparable housing. Further, there was no evidence that moving from the Stallworth home would adversely affect Robert. Nevertheless, the trial court held that Carol and Robert, would be allowed to live in the home until (1) Robert turned 18, got married, or was emancipated or (2) Carol remarried, moved, or began living with another man. When one of these events occurred, Carol was to sell the Stallworth home, and the division of property would be conducted. Carol was ordered to pay the mortgage, taxes, cost to maintain the property, and homeowners’ association fees while living in the Stallworth home. William appealed the trial court’s order regarding the Stallworth family home.

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 (King, 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.

Concurrence/Dissent (Haning, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part.

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 223,000 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.