Watkins

Watkins v. Watkins

Good Law
143 Cal. App. 3d 651·192 Cal. Rptr. 54·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 1798
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 3, 1983Civ. 20926California1,338 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

In this case we hold that where unmarried parties who are living together enter into an implied agreement acknowledged by Marvin v. Marvin (1976) 18 Cal.3d 660 [ 134 Cal.Rptr. 815 , 557 P.2d 106 ], and the parties later marry, the Marvin agreement is enforceable after marriage.

Factual and Procedural Background

In May or June of 1971, Jewel Dene (Judy) and Willis (Buster) Watkins began living together in a manner akin to that described in Marvin v. Marvin, supra. The parties were married on March 16, 1977, and separated eight months later. On April 24,1978, Buster petitioned for a dissolution of that marriage or, in the alternative, a declaration of nullity. On June 26, 1978, Judy filed a separate action for declaratory relief, constructive trust, breach of express contract, breach of implied contract, quantum meruit, fraud, and partner ship dissolution. The two actions were consolidated for purposes of trial. Buster filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings contending that Judy’s cause of action for implied contract was extinguished as a matter of law by their marriage. The trial court denied the motion and a jury ultimately fixed damages for breach of an implied…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.