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 2006–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Geraci v. Geracigreen2 sentences2021Express findings likely will provide a more complete record on appeal and advise the parties that the statute has been followed.10 The failure to make express findings may also become relevant when a judgment “provides no insight into how the court weighed the statutory factors,” raising the question “whether the court in fact weighed or even gave due consideration to the statutory factors.” (In re Marriage of Geraci (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1297 .) In that limited situation an appellate court may decline to accord the usual deference to the court’s exercise of discretion and remand for th 2020(See In re Marriage of Geraci (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1297-1299 [reversing permanent spousal support award, where “record provide[d] no insight into how the court weighed the statutory factors” under § 4320]; In re Marriage of Dick (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 144, 159-160 [affirming temporary support order; 17 substantial evidence supported findings regarding parties’ assets]; In re Marriage of Siegel (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 88, 93 [affirming order modifying support that considered needs of adult child].)5 C. | 1 | 2 |
Shimkus v. Shimkusgreen1 sentence2021(Ibid; see also In re Shimkus (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 1262, 1278 .) That did not happen here. 5. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Siegelgreen1 sentence2020(See In re Marriage of Geraci (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1297-1299 [reversing permanent spousal support award, where “record provide[d] no insight into how the court weighed the statutory factors” under § 4320]; In re Marriage of Dick (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 144, 159-160 [affirming temporary support order; 17 substantial evidence supported findings regarding parties’ assets]; In re Marriage of Siegel (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 88, 93 [affirming order modifying support that considered needs of adult child].)5 C. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Marriage of Dickgreen1 sentence2020(See In re Marriage of Geraci (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1278, 1297-1299 [reversing permanent spousal support award, where “record provide[d] no insight into how the court weighed the statutory factors” under § 4320]; In re Marriage of Dick (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 144, 159-160 [affirming temporary support order; 17 substantial evidence supported findings regarding parties’ assets]; In re Marriage of Siegel (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 88, 93 [affirming order modifying support that considered needs of adult child].)5 C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Marriage of Ditto
green
2 sentences2013"It is the statement of decision which allows the court to place upon the record its view of facts and law of the case. [Citation.] A failure to request a Code of Civil Procedure section 632 statement results in a waiver of such findings; [appellant] cannot now be heard to complain. [Citation.]" (In re Marriage of Ditto (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 643, 647 .) Moreover, in contrast to Geraci, the evidence presented here does not indicate that the trial court failed to weigh or give due consideration to the statutory factors. 2013"It is the statement of decision which allows the court to place upon the record its view of facts and law of the case. [Citation.] A failure to request a Code of Civil Procedure section 632 statement results in a waiver of such findings; [appellant] cannot now be heard to complain. [Citation.]" (In re Marriage of Ditto (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 643, 647 .) Moreover, in contrast to Geraci, the evidence presented here does not indicate that the trial court failed to weigh or give due consideration to the statutory factors. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Cheriton v. Fraser
green
1 sentence2006To the contrary, the trial judge must both recognize and apply each applicable statutory factor in setting spousal support. [Citations.] Failure to do so is reversible error.’ ([In re Marriage of] Cheriton [(2001)] 92 Cal.App.4th [269,] 304 [ 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 755 ].)” 29 Other than the court’s general assertion the factors listed in section 4320 favored an award of spousal support to Jane the record provides no insight into how the court weighed the statutory factors and thus how it exercised its discretion. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.