Cameron

Cameron v. Crocker-Citizens National Bank

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 3d 940·1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1338·97 Cal. Rptr. 269
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 1971Civ. 36967California2,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kaus, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment to the effect that she did not have an equitable interest in the estate of her former husband, Arthur Cameron.

Facts

After a brief marriage, which followed a long courtship, plaintiff and Cameron were divorced in 1961. Although the property settlement agreement limited alimony payments to $1,000 per month for five years, Cameron generously supplemented these payments during the following years. Plaintiff moved to Paris where she became engaged to a.French diplomat. In 1964 she returned to live at the Beverly Hills home which Cameron had once given her as a present. She remained there until Cameron’s death in 1967,. Plaintiff testified that her return to Beverly Hills was caused by Cameron’s oral promise that he would provide for her while alive and leave her a “child’s portion” of his Los Angeles County property. The exact nature of the services plaintiff was to perform for Cameron after taking up residence in Beverly Hills is not certain. It is nevertheless evident that, under plaintiff’s interpretation of her obligations, she was to be at Cameron’s beck and call.

It is not questioned that between 1964 and 1967 Cameron expended over…

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.