Skip to main content

Hatten v. Hatten

Citations

  • 917 P.2d 667
  • 1996 Alas. LEXIS 57
  • 1996 WL 285412

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[W]e conclude under Bandow that the designation or structuring of damages in a settlement agreement does not control whether the proceeds are separate or marital property.”
  • “[I]f the formal structuring of settlement proceeds subsequently controlled their classification as either marital or separate property, then the ‘analytic’ approach [under Bandow] would be meaningless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rabinowitz, Matthews, Compton, Eastaugh, Moore

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.