Community Property Flashcards
Four scenarios re: Call of the Questions
not rule
- Spouses Married in CA
a) If the essay begins with the parties having gotten married in California, it will be a vanilla community property question.
b) Occasionally, you also must determine a creditor’s rights to certain assets to satisfy certain liabilities. - Spouses Married in Non-CP State who later move to CP State; Quasi-Community Property
a) If the husband and wife begin the essay having gotten married in a non-community property state and then move to California, part of the question will include quasi-community property issues as to the property acquired during the marriage but before the parties domiciled in California. - Putative Spouses; Quasi-Marital Property
a) If the parties aren’t legally married, but one of them in good faith thinks they are, then the issues involve putative marriage and quasi-marital property. - Unmarried Cohabitants
a) the parties will be unmarried cohabitants, in which case the community property laws do not apply at all—rather the issues will involve the existence of an implied contract and possible equitable remedies
b) Although they think they are married, under law not marriage and thus treat them as co-habitants
The Main Rule fo Community Property**
California is a community property state. All property acquired during marriage is presumed to be community property unless acquired by gift or inheritance, in which case it is presumed to be separate property. The court determine the character of an asset by tracing back to the source of the funds used to acquire the asset. A mere change in the form of an asset does not change its characterization.
At divorce, the community assets are equally divided in kind unless some special rule requires deviation from the equal division requirement or the spouses agree otherwise; a spouse’s separate property (SP) remains her SP at divorce.
Progression of Presumptions on Each Asset
Approach
- Each major heading should be an asset, a debt, or a creditors’ rights issue.
- For each asset or debt, discuss and apply each and every presumption applicable to the item in this order:
- Start here and apply: Basic CP presumption – The initial community property presumption and its effect;
- Then source presumption (who, how, when) and its effect;
- Then conduct presumption – what did parties do to the asset or what specific rule applies to this asset/debt?
- Distribution – the final character of asset or debt
Initial Presumption
not rule
The property was acquired during marriage is presumed to be community property
Rules applicable under Source Presumption
Subrules
Generally, property acquired with separate property funds retains the separate property character.
Wages earned and used during the marriage is community property. But salary earned after separation is SP.
Rules applicable under Conduct Presumption
Guide
- Transmutation law
a) anti-lucas legislation
b) 1985 cutoff - Joint tenant rules
- Management rules
Transmutation
approach
- Under the anti-Lucas legislation, all jointly held property acquired during the marriage is presumed community property at divorce and legal separation. This applies to:
a) joint tenancy from and after 1/1/85 and
b) tenancy in common from and after 1/1/88. - But at death:
a) If joint tenancy – all to survivor
b) If TIC, to whomever inherits.
Agreement during Marriage - Transmutation
Agreements made during marriage to alter the character of property - transmutation.
—
Note: It is divided into two groups: agreements made before January 1, 1985, and agreements made thereafter.
Transmutation + jointly held property (TIC and JT)
general rule
Transmutations are agreements made during marriage to alter the character of property. In pre-1985 agreements, oral transmutation agreements are okay.
Under the anti-Lucas legislation, all transmutation agreements post-1985 must be in the form of an express written declaration, which expressly state their intention to change the characterization or ownership of the property. Moreover, because of the presumption that all property acquired during marriage is community property, merely taking title in one spouse’s name will not overcome the presumption.
If the property is acquired in joint tenancy pre-1985 (or in tenancy in common pre-1988), the property retains its joint character, and is treated as separate property. Under anti-Lucas legislation, all jointly held property acquired during marriage post-1985 is presumed community property at divorce unless the parties executed a collateral written agreement or a separate statement in the documentary evidence of title that states the property is “separate property and not community property.”
transmutation - joint title rules
approach
- transumation R-A
- Jointed Title rules R-A
Pre-1985 Agreements
Oral transmutation agreements OK.
—
If the spouses agreed to transmute their property before January 1, 1985, they could do so orally, and courts inferred the intent to transmute from the parties’ behavior.
(1) E.g., a reference on a tax return to “our” house was sufficient evidence of the intent to transmute from separate property to community property.
Pre-1985 Agreements
approach
If the exam contains a pre-January 1, 1985 oral agreement, discuss the characterization of assets under two scenarios:
(1) one that assumes the enforceability of the oral agreement, and
(2) one that assumes the non-enforceability of the oral agreement.
Post-January 1, 1985 Agreements
- Under the anti-Lucas legislation, all agreements entered into after January 1, 1985 to transmute property must be in the form of an express written declaration.
- The express declaration must expressly state that a change in the characterization or ownership of the property is intended.
- Moreover, because of the presumption that all property acquired during marriage is community property, merely taking title in one spouse’s name will not overcome the presumption.
- You need the separate express declaration, either in a separate document or sufficient language in the granting clause, stating that the intent is to change the character of the property
- If the property is acquired in joint tenancy before January 1, 1985 (or in tenancy in common before January 1, 1988), the property retains its joint character, and is treated as separate property.
Transumtation of Title Identified as CP after 1985
Rule
All agreements entered into after January 1, 1985, to transmute property must in the form of an express declaration. The express declaration must expressly state that a change in the characterization or ownership of the property is intended by the spouse whose interest is adversely affected. Moreover, because of the presumption that all property acquired during marriage is community property, merely taking title in one spouse’s name will not overcome the presumption.
–
[sample rule]
After January 1, 1985, all transmutations of property from community property to other means of holding title, including separate property, must be done in a separate writing evidencing the intent to effect such transmutation.
Anit-Lucas, jointly held property during marriage post 1985**
sample of rule**
Under anti-Lucas legislation, all jointly held property, including property held in joint tenancy, acquired during marriage after January 1, 1985, is presumed community property at divorce unless the parties executed a collateral written agreement or a separate statement in the documentary evidence of title that the property is “separate property and not community property.”
Joint Title Rules**
3 rules
Under California law (the anti-Lucas legislation), if property is purchased or acquired during marriage in joint title, then all jointly held property, including property held in joint tenancy, is presumed community property at divorce unless the parties executed a collateral written agreement or a statement in the documentary evidence of title that the property is “separate property and not community property.”
…
Rule 2 (not in mega rule)
If the jointly titled property is treated as community property, then at divorce the separate property contributions to the acquisition of the property shall be reimbursed to the separate property contributor without interest or appreciation.
—
Rule 3 (not in mega rule)
If jointly titled property is not presumed community property on death, it either remains joint tenancy and goes to the surviving spouse, or tenancy in common and goes according to decedent’s will.
Exception to Transmutation Non-Substantial Personal Gift from Spouse
The writing requirement does not extend to a gift between spouses that is of personal nature, principally used by the spouse to whom the gift is made, and is not substantial in value, taking into account the marriage’s financial circumstances.
—
The writing requirement does not extend to gifts between the spouses of items of a personal nature that are used principally by the spouse to whom the gift is made and that is not substantial in value, taking into account the marriage’s financial circumstances.
Fidicuary Duty to Manage Assets rules
Under Conduct Based
Spouses owe each other fiduciary duties, which govern the actions of persons in confidential relationships, with respect to management and control of the CP. Thus, deliberate dissipation of community property, recklessness, and grossly negligent conduct that results in the loss of community property are actionable, and and may impose the culpable spouse to reimburse the community for any loss. However, these are not as strict as a prudent investor standard, so merely negligent investment will not result in a requirement of reimbursement.
—
[selected topics]
In the management and control of community assets, each spouse must act in accordance with the general rules governing fiduciary relationships which govern the actions of persons in confidential relationships. Thus, deliberate dissipation of community property, recklessness, and grossly negligent conduct that results in the loss of community property are actionable, and can result in the requirement that the culpable spouse reimburse the community for any loss. However, these are not as strict as a prudent investor standard, so merely negligent investment will not result in a requirement of reimbursement.
undue influence
Under Conduct Based - fidicuary duty
Spouses owe each other fiduciary duties, which govern the actions of persons in confidential relationships, with respect to management and control of the CP. Thus, a rebuttable presumption of undue influence arises when one spouse gains an advantage over the other in a property transaction; the spouse who obtained the advantage bears the burden of rebutting the presumption.
barbri
Rules applicable under Distribution
- property under joint tenancy
- separate property and its appreciation
Distribution for jointly titled property is treated as community property
If the jointly titled property is treated as community property, then at divorce the separate property contributions to the acquisition of the property shall be reimbursed to the separate property contributor without interest or appreciation.
SP on Divorce
Distribution
On divorce, separate property contributions to the acquisition of the property are reimbursed to the separate property contributor without interest or appreciation.
—
If a spouse, during marriage, contributes separate property into the acquisition of property in joint title, apply the anti-Lucas legislation so that there is a CP presumption at divorce, but then discuss that such spouse has a right to reimbursement of the SP in the value of the property as of the date of contribution into joint title.
Distribution for Separate Property and Its Appreciation
When the separate property of a spouse increase in value during the marriage due to external factors, the status of the property does not change from its original classification.
Quasi-Community Property**
Quasi-community property (QCP) is property acquired by either spouse that would have been community property had the spouse been domiciled in California at the time of the acquisition. At divorce, quasi-community property is treated the same as community property.
—
Note:
* analyze with the three presumption, except it is QCP
* ALWAYS explain HOW and WHY QCP would have been community property had the spouse been domiciled in California – using presumptions
* look at the Essay 2 for QCP
Other Community Property State
other community property state are Arizona, Idaho, NM, Louisiana, Nevada, Washington, or Wisconsin at the time of the acquisition of the property
QCP status when first acquire before death or divorce
Until divorce or death, the quasi-community property remains the separate property of the acquiring spouse.
But when the property acquired in non-CP state by spouses while domiciled in a CP state, the property is CP, not QCP.
Divorce or death of acquiring spouse in non-CP state for QCP
a) At divorce, or on the death of the acquiring spouse, for the purposes of creditors’ rights, the QCP is treated the same as community property.
b) If the non-acquiring spouse dies first, the quasi-community property remains the separate property of the acquiring spouse.
c) If the property is acquired by both spouses in joint title in a non-community property state, follow the joint title rules.
Obtaining the House with Mortgage
Tip
Discuss the three presumption for character of the house and a separate heading for character of mortgage debt
Putative Spouse
One that has a good faith belief that he or she is lawfully married, even though he or she is not. All property acquired during the putative marriage is labeled as quasi-marital property (QMP) whether it would have been community property or quasi-community property had the marriage been valid.
Putative Spouse and QMP
Approach
If you have a putative spouse fact pattern lay out and discuss QMP:
- First set out rules regarding putative marriage and Quasi Marital Property
a) All property acquired during the putative marriage is labeled as QMP – whether it otherwise would have been CP or QCP.
b) But then treat it under normal CP and QCP rules - Handle the rest of the question as if:
a) Discuss as QMP but treat as community property
as if it were a regular community property question, BUT always refer to Quasi Marital Property (QMP) rather than Community or Quasi-Community Property (QCP)
b) SP remains discussed as SP
If the property would have been separate property (SP) had the spouses been lawfully married, it remains SP, and you call it SP
Other Spouse Knows Defects in the Marriage
Approach
If the other spouse knows of the defect in the marriage, although it is unclear how their share would be treated:
a) discuss the putative spouse’s rights as if they were a legal spouse, and
b) leave open the rights of a non-putative spouse, or treat them the same.
c) Support: at least in the Marvin case, the Supreme Court has suggested that it might still treat the putative spouses equally and divide the QMP as if it were community property.
Unmarried Cohabitants
If the parties are not putative spouses, but just unmarried cohabitants, then generally the community property rules do not apply.
Unmarried Cohabitants
Approach+Rule
- Do NOT apply Community Property principles
- Instead, apply contract principles (express or implied contract) and, if applicable, restitutionary remedies (unjust enrichment, constructive or resulting trust)
- Rule: Consideration MAY NOT include sexual services
- However, the court will not enforce any contract formed where the consideration includes sexual services.
- On such an exam, marshal the facts to determine whether they suggest an implied agreement.
Cohabiting Couple under Marvin
California does not have common law marriage but instead uses contract principles for cohabitating couples. General contracts apply to persons who never evidenced any intention to enter into lawful marriage. The court held that parties can contract with each other to create a support obligation or other ownership relationship. Under such circumstances, the court has the power to divide the property according to the couple’s reasonable expectations during cohabitation. Absent an express contract, a party may prove a contract implied by the parties’ behavior or a partnership or joint venture agreement. California does not enforce contracts based on sexual acts as consideration, [but the mere fact a sexual relationship is involved does not in itself invalidate the agreement.]
barbri+kaplan+mainero
When Marital Economic Community Property Begins and Ends
The martial economic community begins at marriage and ends at the death of one’s spouse or on the date of separation. To terminate the marital economic community by separation, there must be a complete and final break in the marital relationship, which requires: (i) a spouse to express an intent to end the marriage to the other spouse, and (ii) conduct consistent with that intent.
Debts for Common Necessary of Life
Subrule-Marital Economic Community Property
However, the court would include all parties liable for debts that are a common necessary of life.