Kirchberg v. Feenstra

450 U.S. 455 (1981)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

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 During the appeals process, the statute that allowed H to do what he did was repealed, but those provisions did not take effect until 1980.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.