In Re Marriage of Tamraz

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 488·24 Cal. App. 4th 1740·30 Cal. Rptr. 2d 233·94 Daily Journal DAR 6753·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3680
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 1994Docket Nos. B070292, B072405California2,704 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

In consolidated actions for dissolution of marriage the trial court awarded judgment to wife based on a marital settlement agreement and ordered the judgment effective nunc pro tunc. In a subsequent order, the trial court awarded attorney fees to wife. We affirm.

Facts and Proceedings Below

We will refer to appellant, Joel Tamraz, as “husband” and respondent, Barbara Tamraz, as “wife.”

In September 1976, husband filed an action for dissolution of marriage. In October of that year husband and wife entered into a marital settlement agreement ‘to effect a complete and final settlement of all matters with reference to the rights of each party „ „ . Among other things, the agreement provided for the distribution of community assets, payment of child support, and attorney fees in the event of an action or proceeding to enforce the agreement.

With respect to wife’s community property share in husband’s law practice, the parties agreed there were outstanding preseparation accounts receivable for legal work performed by husband. They agreed that as those bills were collected husband would pay a designated percentage to wife and husband will periodically account to wife for the…

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.