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

Marvin v. Marvin (III)

California Court of Appeal
122 Cal. App. 3d 871 (1981)


Facts

Michelle Marvin (plaintiff) and Lee Marvin (defendant) met in June 1964 and began living together in October 1964. The parties lived together until mid-1970 when Lee ended the relationship and living arrangement. The parties had agreed to live together unmarried as long as they each enjoyed the other’s company and affection. Upon the termination of their relationship and living arrangement, Michelle filed an action against Lee for property and support. Michelle alleged that the parties had an express agreement that she would give up her career in order to become a companion and homemaker for Lee and that Lee agreed to care for her financially for the rest of her life. Michelle also alleged that the parties had an implied agreement for Lee to support her and that Michelle had given up her career as a dancer, which she could not easily reenter years later, in reliance on that agreement. On a prior appeal, it was determined that Michelle could proceed against Lee on her claims of breach of an express contract and implied contract. Lee denied the existence of an express contract and denied that he had any understanding of an implied agreement. The matter was remanded to the trial court to hear evidence. The trial court found that Michelle had benefitted financially from being in the relationship by receiving more funds and assets as gifts from Lee than she would have been able to earn on her own. However, the trial court also determined that Michelle was entitled to $104,000 from Lee for economic rehabilitation, as she could no longer work as a dancer and entertainer. Lee appealed the trial court’s decision.

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 (Cobey, 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 220,000 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.