Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Marriage of Brebaugh v. Deane Case Brief

Court of Appeals of Arizona2005Docket #257396
118 P.3d 43 211 Ariz. 95 2005 Ariz. App. LEXIS 100 Family Law Property Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: In a divorce, an Arizona court ruled that unvested stock options are not automatically community property. The case was remanded for the trial court to determine the employer’s intent for the grant (past reward vs. future incentive) and apply a time-rule formula to apportion the asset.

Legal Significance: This case establishes the Arizona framework for dividing unvested stock options in a dissolution. It mandates an inquiry into the employer’s intent and adopts the use of time-rule formulas, such as the Hug and Nelson formulas, to apportion community and separate property interests.

Marriage of Brebaugh v. Deane Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

William Brebaugh (“Husband”) and Nancy Deane (“Wife”) divorced after thirty years of marriage. During the marriage, Husband’s employer, Apollo Group, Inc., granted him blocks of stock options. The parties disputed the characterization of options that were granted during the marriage but were not scheduled to vest until after the date the dissolution petition was served. The stock option agreements stated their purpose was to encourage key employees to remain with the company and to provide a proprietary interest in its success. Vesting occurred annually over four years but could be accelerated if the company met certain performance goals. Husband argued the unvested options were an incentive for his future performance and thus his separate property. Wife argued they were deferred compensation for past marital efforts and thus entirely community property. The trial court, finding Husband had failed to rebut the community property presumption by clear and convincing evidence, characterized all the disputed options as community property and awarded Wife one-half.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: How should unvested stock options, granted during a marriage but vesting after the service of a dissolution petition, be characterized and divided under Arizona’s community property law?

The court reversed the trial court’s characterization of the unvested stock options Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

How should unvested stock options, granted during a marriage but vesting after the service of a dissolution petition, be characterized and divided under Arizona’s community property law?

Conclusion

This decision aligns Arizona with the majority of community property states by Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in

Legal Rule

Unvested stock options granted during a marriage are analogous to unvested pension Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est labo

Legal Analysis

The court began with the presumption that property acquired during marriage is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris n

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Unvested stock options granted during marriage are analogous to unvested pensions
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occae

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More