In Re Marriage of Hug

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allocating the husband's unvested stock options as marital property
• stressing that no single rule or formula can be used in every case and that trial courts should have discretion to fashion approaches that will result in most equitable outcome
• applying a time rule to certain stock options as they were paid after the marriage to allocate the portions of those options which were attributable to efforts expended during the marriage
• approving the use of a time rule to apportion stock options awarded during the marriage but unvested at the time of the divorce petition but stating \we stress that no single rule or formula is applicable to every dissolution case involving stock options\
• unvested stock options correctly allocated between compensation for services prior to and after date of separation because, under California Civil Code § 5118, postseparation earnings are separate property
• “since the purposes underlying stock options differ, reference to the facts of each particular case must be made to reveal the features and implications of a particular employee stock option”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).