Cranwell v. Cranwell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that there was no common residence in part because the absence of toiletries and other personal items necessary for daily living demonstrated that they were “set up for visits but not for living”
• While “proof of a common . . . residence does not itself establish cohabitation,” it is nevertheless a “requirement for cohabitation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).