Vasquez v. Hawthorne case brief summary
33 P.3d 735 (2001)
CASE FACTS
The instant court concluded that the trial court erred in resolving this case on summary judgment. It was also error for the appellate court to reach the merits of the case. The record on summary judgment was inadequate to reach the legal issue presented. The nature of the relationship between plaintiff and the decedent was disputed. Plaintiff, who presented claims for equitable relief under several theories, including meretricious relationship, implied partnership, and equitable trust, presented affidavits asserting he and the decedent were a same sex couple. Defendant, the decedent's estate, offered affidavits contending that plaintiff and the decedent were not a same sex couple and did not hold themselves out as such. From the affidavits, the trial court could not determine what type of relationship existed between plaintiff and the decedent. Nor could the trial court conclude what property acquired during the course of their relationship could be subject to equitable division.
DISCUSSION
The instant court directed the trial court to weigh the evidence to determine whether plaintiff established his claim for equitable relief.
CONCLUSION
The instant court vacated the decision of the appellate court, reversed the trial court's granting of plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment, and remanded this case for trial.
Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Constitutional Law
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
33 P.3d 735 (2001)
CASE SYNOPSIS
A trial court held that plaintiff had
proved he was involved in a long-term, stable, cohabiting
relationship with the decedent. The trial court further found the
property acquired during the relationship was the joint property of
plaintiff and the decedent, and that it passed to plaintiff upon the
decedent's death. The Washington Court of Appeals reversed the trial
court's summary judgment decision. Plaintiff sought review.CASE FACTS
The instant court concluded that the trial court erred in resolving this case on summary judgment. It was also error for the appellate court to reach the merits of the case. The record on summary judgment was inadequate to reach the legal issue presented. The nature of the relationship between plaintiff and the decedent was disputed. Plaintiff, who presented claims for equitable relief under several theories, including meretricious relationship, implied partnership, and equitable trust, presented affidavits asserting he and the decedent were a same sex couple. Defendant, the decedent's estate, offered affidavits contending that plaintiff and the decedent were not a same sex couple and did not hold themselves out as such. From the affidavits, the trial court could not determine what type of relationship existed between plaintiff and the decedent. Nor could the trial court conclude what property acquired during the course of their relationship could be subject to equitable division.
DISCUSSION
The instant court directed the trial court to weigh the evidence to determine whether plaintiff established his claim for equitable relief.
CONCLUSION
The instant court vacated the decision of the appellate court, reversed the trial court's granting of plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment, and remanded this case for trial.
Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Constitutional Law
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment