In Re the Marriage of Kilbourne

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 900·232 Cal. App. 3d 1518·284 Cal. Rptr. 201·91 Daily Journal DAR 9640·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6295
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 6, 1991A044736California2,922 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dossee, J.

—This is an action for dissolution of marriage. Wife’s petition was filed February 14, 1983. In protracted proceedings extending from October 1985 to January 1986, the trial court took evidence regarding the value of two pieces of real estate, husband’s law practice, numerous bank accounts, stocks and bonds and items of personal property. The trial court issued its memorandum of tentative decision on April 29, 1986, and eventually adopted it as its statement of decision. The court ordered wife’s attorney to prepare the judgment. Two and a half years later, in November 1988, the trial court reiterated its order to wife’s attorney to prepare the judgment. Judgment was eventually entered in December 1988 . Husband appeals and confines his arguments to two item: the family residence and husband’s law practice.

I. The House

II. The Law Practice

Husband is a lawyer, who had been practicing law for 18 years when he married wife in 1970. At the time of the marriage, husband was working in the law offices of Marcus & Ury, Inc., from whom he received a salary. Husband had a few cases of his own, but not enough to make a living. In 1971, husband left Marcus & Ury and opened his…

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.