Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 California opinions name it 1 courts 1983–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re Marriage of Fransengreen2 sentences2015(In re Marriage of Fransen (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 419, 424-425 [ 190 Cal.Rptr. 885 ]; § 4320.) “[T]he trial court must not limit itself to an award based entirely upon need.” (In re Marriage of Fransen, at p. 425.) Further, a husband “is not entitled to a disproportionately higher standard of living than [the] [w]ife.” (McNaughton, supra, 145 Cal.App.3d at p. 851.) Additionally, the court determined Linda needed additional time to “prudently and permanently invest all of her ‘investable’ assets, including the $10 [m]illion equalization payment awarded her herein .... [T]he post-separation perio 2015(In re Marriage of Fransen (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 419, 424-425 [ 190 Cal.Rptr. 885 ]; § 4320.) “[T]he trial court must not limit itself to an award based entirely upon need.” (In re Marriage of Fransen, at p. 425.) Further, a husband “is not entitled to a disproportionately higher standard of living than [the] [w]ife.” (McNaughton, supra, 145 Cal.App.3d at p. 851.) Additionally, the court determined Linda needed additional time to “prudently and permanently invest all of her ‘investable’ assets, including the $10 [m]illion equalization payment awarded her herein .... [T]he post-separation perio | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Marriage of McNaughton
green
2 sentences2015(In re Marriage of Fransen (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 419, 424-425 ; § 4320.) "[T]he trial court must not limit itself to an award based entirely upon need." (In re Marriage of Fransen, at p. 425.) Further, a husband "is not entitled to a disproportionately higher standard of living than [the] [w]ife." (McNaughton, supra, 145 Cal.App.3d at p. 841 .) Additionally, the court determined Linda needed additional time to "prudently and permanently invest all of her 'investable' assets, including the $10 [m]illion equalization payment awarded her herein. . . . [T]he post-separation period has 38 been a pe 2015(In re Marriage of Fransen (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 419, 424-425 ; § 4320.) "[T]he trial court must not limit itself to an award based entirely upon need." (In re Marriage of Fransen, at p. 425.) Further, a husband "is not entitled to a disproportionately higher standard of living than [the] [w]ife." (McNaughton, supra, 145 Cal.App.3d at p. 841 .) Additionally, the court determined Linda needed additional time to "prudently and permanently invest all of her 'investable' assets, including the $10 [m]illion equalization payment awarded her herein. . . . [T]he post-separation period has 38 been a pe | 3 | 2015–2023 |
In Re Marriage of Andreen
green
2 sentences2023(See, e.g., Andreen, supra, 76 Cal.App.3d at pp. 671−672; In re Marriage of McNaughton (1983) 145 Cal.App.3d 845 , 851−852.) “[W]e agree that it would be an abuse of discretion to order 14 We do not agree with Jacqueline that she was expected to dip into her savings to maintain her marital standard of living. 1983(In re Marriage of Andreen (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d *852 667 [ 143 Cal.Rptr. 94 ].) Arguments that a spouse could live with less are properly addressed to the trial court. | 2 | 1983–2023 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.