Fear Not Law Articles: BURKLE v. BURKLE ( Part II )

BURKLE v

BURKLE v. BURKLE

Filed 5/18/06

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

In re Marriage of JANET E. and

RONALD W. BURKLE.

B179751

JANET E. BURKLE,

Appellant,

RONALD W. BURKLE,

Respondent.

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BD390479)

Story Continued from Part Iâ€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦

The merger between Smith's and Fred Meyer (the first merger, consummated on September 9, 1997 and involving property Mr. Burkle claimed as separate) was known to Ms. Burkle before she entered into the agreement.

At the meeting of the parties and counsel on September 6, 1997, Mr. Burkle discussed with Ms. Burkle and Harlan the possibility of a merger between Food-4-Less/Ralphs and Fred Meyer/Hughes (the second merger). And, Harlan subsequently referred to a possible merger in his September 16, 1997 memorandum to Karton:

â€

Description	A decision regarding enforceability of a post-marital agreement as to community property assets,. A presumption of undue influence does not arise in an interspousal transaction unless one spouse obtains an unfair advantage or obtains property for which no or clearly inadequate consideration has been given.
Rating	80/5 1 2 3 4 5 4/5 based on 1 vote.