From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carmichael v. Carmichael

Court of Appeal of California, Third District
Dec 20, 1961
198 Cal.App.2d 304 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961)

Opinion

Docket No. 10440.

December 20, 1961.

APPLICATION for a writ of supersedeas to stay proceedings pending appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yuba County. J.F. Good, Judge. Writ denied.

Assigned by Chairman of Judicial Council.

Manwell Manwell, Theodore G. Elges, Bradford, Cross, Dahl Hefner and John Laugenour for Defendant and Appellant.

Steel and Arostegui and Robert Steel for Plaintiff and Respondent.


THE COURT.

[1] It is the conclusion of the court that the clear implication of the decree is that plaintiff should have immediate occupancy of the property in question. While her title to the property would not be complete until the decree became final and would be defeated by death or reconciliation during the interlocutory period, we hold that reason, common sense and authority entitle her in the meantime to the right to possession of the property awarded to her. ( Wilson v. Wilson, 76 Cal.App.2d 119, 132 [ 172 P.2d 568]; Code Civ. Proc., § 945) The order heretofore made staying any further proceedings is hereby discharged and the petition for supersedeas is denied.


Summaries of

Carmichael v. Carmichael

Court of Appeal of California, Third District
Dec 20, 1961
198 Cal.App.2d 304 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961)
Case details for

Carmichael v. Carmichael

Case Details

Full title:DORIS CARMICHAEL, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANK CARMICHAEL, Defendant…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Third District

Date published: Dec 20, 1961

Citations

198 Cal.App.2d 304 (Cal. Ct. App. 1961)
17 Cal. Rptr. 558

Citing Cases

Carmichael v. Carmichael

While her title to the property would not be complete until the decree became final and would be defeated by…