Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Becchelli v. Becchelli, 508 P.2d 59.
- Batesole v. Batesole 535 P.2d 1314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
-
Batesole v. Batesole
535 P.2d 1314
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
ties either as joint tenants with right of survivorship, as tenants in common, or as tenants by the entirety, the court may in the same action, on its own initiative or on petition of either party, order division of such property in the manner provided by title Í2, chapter 8, article 7.” , and O’Hair v. O’Hair
- Pettibone v. Pettibone 529 P.2d 724 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
- Pettibone v. Pettibone 529 P.2d 724 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
- Oppenheimer v. Oppenheimer 526 P.2d 762 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
-
Oppenheimer v. Oppenheimer
526 P.2d 762
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
our Supreme Court held that the superior court had no “authority to divide as seems just and right jointly held property.” Id.
- Pantano v. Pantano 521 P.2d 640 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
-
Pantano v. Pantano
521 P.2d 640
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
The trial court, in the case sub judice, , which was handed down approximately seven weeks after this divorce trial.
- Reid v. Reid 511 P.2d 664 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
- Harris v. Harris 511 P.2d 667 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
-
Harris v. Harris
511 P.2d 667
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
The entire aspect of the trial court’s distribution of the property, both *224 community and joint tenancy, , which held A.R.S.
-
Reid v. Reid
511 P.2d 664
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
stated that the trial court must divide joint tenancy property equally.
- Williams v. Williams 509 P.2d 237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
-
Williams v. Williams
509 P.2d 237
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
■ *546 FAMILY HOME HELD IN JOINT TENANCY WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP Our Supreme Court has recently, , held that the trial court has no authority to make an equitable division of property held in joint tenancy and must divide it equally if so requested by the parties.