In Re the Marriage of Hahn

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 1046·224 Cal. App. 3d 1236·273 Cal. Rptr. 516
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 1990G007591California1,620 words

Opinion

Opinion

Crosby, J.

In this action for dissolution of the parties’ marriage, husband sought to have the family home sold and the proceeds divided. He stipulated to the value of the residence set by his own appraiser. Nevertheless, the court acceded to wife’s request that the property be awarded to her with appropriate offsets. After trial but before entry of judgment, husband moved to reopen with evidence of higher and more recent comparable sales figures. The court declined and he appeals. We affirm.

I

Based on the parties’ oral stipulation at trial on July 13, 1988, the court determined the community home was worth $179,000. At oral argument before us, counsel for husband bluntly stated there was no pretrial stipulation concerning its value. That claim is thoroughly belied by the appellate record, and we will not dignify it with further comment.

Husband maintains he should have been allowed to reopen the trial and present evidence that the home was actually worth $225,000, based on more recent sales of comparable properties. But in the usual case a party may not unilaterally avoid a valid stipulation for obvious reasons: “A stipulation is an agreement between attorneys for adverse…

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.