Sargent v. Sargent
Citations
- 106 Cal. 541
- 39 P. 931
- 1895 Cal. LEXIS 638
Syllabus
<p>Husband and Wife—Desertion—Contract of Separation—Construction of Code—Revocation.—Section 101 of the Civil Code, which provides that “ consent to a separation is a revocable act, and, if one of the parties afterward in good faith, seeks a reconciliation and restoration, but the other refuses, such refusal is desertion,” was intended simply to declare the effect of such revocation upon the legal status of the parties as affecting desertion as a ground of divorce, and does not provide for a revocation of the contract of separation provided for in section 159 of the same code, which provides that husband and wife “ can agree in writing to an immediate separation, and may make provision for the support of either of them and of their children during such separation”; and, until avoided by the mutual resumption of marital duties, or the divorce of the parties, such contract remains binding and obligatory upon the parties thereto as effectually as any other contract, subject only to the limitation imposed by section 101.</p> <p>Id.—Contract for Custody of Children.—Parents have a right to contract with each other as to the custody and control of their offspring, and to stipulate away their parental rights; and such contracts are binding upon them until other disposition of the children is made in an action for divorce or other proceedings in which the court may dispose of the custody of the children.</p>
Judges: Fleet
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Puckett v. PuckettCalifornia Supreme Court· 1943-04-12· cited 112×
- Munson v. MunsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1946-02-15· cited 69×
- Dunkin v. BoskeyCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2000-07-14· cited 55×
- Jones v. LamontCalifornia Supreme Court· 1897-10-08· cited 47×
- Mundt v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal· 1939-11-10· cited 29×
- Peters v. PetersCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1936-09-01· cited 24×
- Stewart v. StewartCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1955-01-12· cited 17×
- Morgan v. MorganCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1951-08-20· cited 13×
- Finnegan v. FinneganCalifornia Supreme Court· 1954-05-04· cited 11×
- Tompkins v. TompkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1962-04-02· cited 11×
- Vanderburgh v. VanderburghSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1922-05-19· cited 11×
- Denham v. MartinaCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1963-03-21· cited 8×
- Cohn v. CohnCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1941-11-07· cited 5×
- Hardy v. CommissionerBoard of Tax Appeals· 1941-03-13· cited 1×
- Estate of MenihanCalifornia Superior Court· 1915-05-12
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
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.