Marriage of Stenquist

582 P.2d 96 (1978)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
M
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Marriage of Stenquist

California Supreme Court
582 P.2d 96 (1978)

Facts

Mr. Stenquist (plaintiff) and Mrs. Stenquist (defendant) were married in 1950. Mr. Stenquist had served with the Army since 1944. In 1953, Mr. Stenquist became disabled as a result of a service injury. Mr. Stenquist had the option of leaving military service with a disability pay of 75 percent of his base pay as of 1953 based upon his rank at that time. Instead, Mr. Stenquist continued to serve actively until 1970, at which time Mr. Stenquist was eligible for either regular retirement at 65 percent of his base pay, determined by his rank and years of service as of 1970 or disability payments at 75 percent of his base pay as of 1970. Because Mr. Stenquist had achieved a higher rank and had more years of service, the actual value of Mr. Stenquist's 1970 base pay was significantly higher than in 1953. Mr. Stenquist chose disability payments at 75 percent of his base pay. In 1974, Mr. Stenquist filed for divorce. The trial court held that there was a community-property interest in a portion of Mr. Stenquist's disability payments. The trial court determined the proportion of community-property interest in Mr. Stenquist’s disability payments by applying the time-rule determination to the part of the payments that would have been earned under Mr. Stenquist’s 65 percent regular retirement pay. Mr. Stenquist appealed the trial court's decision.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Tobriner, 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 806,000 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 806,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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

Casebooks

California Community Property

Key Terms