In Re the Marriage of Czapar

Bad Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 882·232 Cal. App. 3d 1308·285 Cal. Rptr. 479·91 Daily Journal DAR 9363·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6041
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 30, 1991G008482California3,364 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallin, J.

—William and Phyllis Czapar each appeal from the judgment in this marital dissolution. Phyllis contends the trial court erred in deducting the value of a future covenant not to compete from the value of the family business awarded to William. William contends the trial court erred in reclassifying certain amounts paid to Phyllis during separation as spousal support, finding he had wasted community assets by his mismanagement of the family business during separation and awarding Phyllis attorneys’ fees. We conclude the future covenant not to compete was improperly considered and remand for further proceedings. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed.

William filed a petition for marital dissolution in September 1984 to end his 22-year marriage to Phyllis. A major asset of the parties was a business called Anaheim Custom Extruders, Inc. (ACE), a plastic extruding company, which was started by them in 1977. William and Phyllis agree the business is community property.

The parties separated in January 1983. Before separation, William managed, and Phyllis had been employed by, ACE. After separation, William continued to manage ACE. Phyllis also continued to work for…

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.