Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Joan (W) filed a criminal complaint against her husband, Harold, (H) for molesting their minor daughter. H retained an attorney, Kirchberg, to represent him and signed a $3,000 promissory note for payment of those services. As security for that note, H executed a mortgage in favor of the attorney on the home he owned jointly with his wife. A state statute allowed H to do this as it gave the husband exclusive control over the disposition of community property. The charges were eventually dropped against H and H obtained a legal separation from his wife and moved out of State. W learned of the mortgage when the attorney threatened for foreclose. The attorney got an order of executory process directing the local sheriff to seize and sell the home. W appealed. During the appeals process, the statute that allowed H to do what he did was repealed, but those provisions did not take effect until 1980. The Court of Appeals invalidated the statute. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co