Recent Posts in Transmutations Category
| September 23, 2010 |
| What METHODS OF TRACINGS Do Family Courts Use? |
| Posted By Thurman Arnold |
 |
Q. What rules apply to how tracings are performed in California dissolutions and what must be shown?
A. In order to unwind transactions during marriage where monies and property with separate and community property attributes have been mixed together, the "separatizer" (the party seeking to establish their separate property contributions to the community or separate property of the other spouse or partner) has the burden of proof to present reliable tracing evidence to the Court. In order to settle even mildly complex disso's as between the parties without going to trial, this information must be provided to convince the other side that you have the ability to meet your burden.
Here are some of the rules that apply the mechanics of tracings in dissolution actions and legal separations.
If the commingled funds are used to purchase property, the party who deposited the separate funds may attempt to trace the source of the funds used to purchase the property to establish that it is separate because separate funds were used to purchase it. This may overcome the presumption that property acquired during marriage is community. Marriage of Mix (1975) 14 C3d 604.
If separate and community property or funds are commingled in such a manner that it is impossible to trace the source of the property or funds, the whole must be treated as community property. Marriage of Mix, supra.
If the title to the property was taken jointly, tracing cannot be used to overcome the presumption from the form of title. Marriage of Lucas (1980) 27 C3d 808, 813–814.
Direct tracing and tracing through family expenses are two independent methods of tracing to establish that property purchased with commingled funds is separate property.
Direct Tracing
Separate funds do not lose their separate character when commingled with community funds in a bank account so long as the amount of separate funds can be ascertained. Marriage of Mix (1975) 14 C3d 604.
If money is withdrawn to purchase specific property, questions of fact that must be determined include (Marriage of Mix, supra):
• Whether separate funds continue to be on deposit; and
• Whether the drawer intended to withdraw separate funds.
The party seeking to establish a separate interest in presumptive community property must keep adequate records. The party must show the exact amount of money allocable to separate property and the exact amount of money allocable to community property before it can be said that the money allocable to separate property is not so commingled that all funds in the account are community property. Marriage of Frick (1986) 181 CA3d 997. If the payments claimed to be separate were made periodically, each payment must have been made when separate property funds were in the account and must have been accompanied by an intent to use those funds rather than community funds.
Marriage of Higinbotham (1988) 203 CA3d 322, 329.
Tracing Through Family Expenses
The second method of tracing to establish that property purchased with commingled funds is separate property requires a consideration of family expenses. This tracing method is based on the presumption that family expenses are paid from community funds.
If at the time the property is acquired it can be shown that all community income in a commingled account was exhausted by family expenses, then all funds remaining in the account at the time the property was purchased were necessarily separate funds. Marriage of Mix, supra.
This method can be used only when, through no fault of the spouse claiming separate property, it is not possible to ascertain the balance of income and expenditures at the time property was acquired. See v See (1966) 64 C2d 778, 784.
The spouse claiming separate property must keep adequate records to overcome the presumption that property acquired during marriage is community property. See v See, supra. Most people don't.
If you are contemplating a divorce and have tracing issues, protect your records now so that they do not 'disappear.' It can be very expensive to obtain bank statements and canceled checks dating back years, and with all of the bank failures and mergers today these records may become impossible to obtain. If you cannot meet your tracing burden of proof, you lose on the particular reimbursement issue....
T.W. ARNOLD
www.ThurmanArnold.com |
|
| Continue reading "What METHODS OF TRACINGS Do Family Courts Use?" » |
|
Permalink | Comments(0)  |
| |
| September 16, 2010 |
| What Does TRACING Refer to in CALIFORNIA DIVORCE CASES? |
| Posted By Thurman Arnold |
|
Q. What is meant by tracings in California in the context of divorce, domestic partnership dissolution, or legal separation?
A. Married people routinely combine cash and assets in ways that must be disentangled if either party later claims that some of those assets were their separate property and wants it returned - I rarely see a case where they don't. In the absence of a prenup agreement saying otherwise, money or property acquired through the time, skill, or industry of either spouse between the date of marriage or registered domestic partnership and physical separation is presumed to be the community property of both parties. Property owned or acquired by either before marriage or after the date of separation, or inherited or gifted to them during marriage, is considered to be that party's separate property to the extent it can be shown to still exist. Separate property is not reimbursed where it has been spent on living expenses, although it may be reimbursed when spent on certain other categories of items. Usually the question involves who is entitled to what share of some asset which is still in existence.
Typical examples include:
- One spouse has money in a savings or investment account before marriage. They then deposit earnings into that account after marriage. The account is used for living expenses. At the end of the relationship, what portion of what remains is separate and what is community?
- The other party is added to a formerly separate property deposit account, for instance so that the account can be held in joint tenancy to avoid probate in the event of death.
- Spouse A inherits $500,000 from grandma during the marriage. This separate property inheritance gets put into a jointly titled bank account, into which other monies flow in and out. How is the balance divided?
- Spouse A then contributes some of this inheritance to the purchase of a new residence. Title is taken jointly. When the couple splits, Spouse A naturally wants their contribution back. How is this achieved?
- A married couple decides to establish a Living Trust to protect them both in the event of death or incapacity. They fund the Trust by transferring cash and real estate into it. A common mistake made by Estate lawyers is to describe the trust property as "community property" and to add a provision that says that if the parties divorce, this property will not be considered to be community and will be restored to each contributing party. Unfortunately, once separate property is declared in such instruments to be community a transmutation has occurred and the language that it is to be restored is of no legal effect - only a new transmutation will resurrect the status quo before the transfer. However, Family Code section 2640 provides that separate property contributions will nonetheless be reimbursed to the extent that the amounts can be separated out and established. The person seeking to confirm their SP contribution must trace the funds in order to receive this reimbursement.
- One spouse places their separate property into the name of the other spouse, possibly to hide it from creditors or other family members. Upon separation, the receiving spouse claims it was a gift and wants to keep it all.
- During the marriage one spouse's separate property is used to build an addition to the jointly titled home that significantly increases its value. When the house is valued and ordered sold, or purchased by one of the two partners, this contribution to improvements may be reimbursed if it can be traced to a separate property source.
Variations of this theme are endless because people when they get married just don't contemplate the relationship failing, don't understand the legal consequences of what they do, are reassured by their spouse in pillow talk that they will be reimbursed, and so blindly throw assets into a common pot in which the character and value of the contributions become mixed and muddied.
The separation of these interests all require tracings, often involving transactions spanning many years. Maybe bank and other records still exist, but maybe they have been lost, destroyed, or hidden by the other. Even attorneys with some years in family law practice don't have a firm grasp on what tracings require in determining community separate property interests. When separate property and community property are commingled in an account, tracing issues arise.
Sometimes these accountings are relatively simple. Frequently they require the use of a forensic accountant.
Thurman W. Arnold, CFLS
www.ThurmanArnold.com
|
|
| Continue reading "What Does TRACING Refer to in CALIFORNIA DIVORCE CASES?" » |
|
| Permalink | Comments(0) |
| |
| April 08, 2010 |
| I am not on TITLE or our HOME, but we paid the MORTGAGE for 7 years.... |
| Posted By Thurman Arnold |
|
Q. I am not on title to a home my husband owned before we married but we paid the mortgage for 7 years. If we divorce, do I have any interest in it?
A. There is an important concept under California Law involving what is generally known as "Moore-Marsden apportionment."
It applies to a common situation where a home is acquired before marriage, title is in the name of the acquiring spouse alone, and during the marriage and up to separation or divorce filing the mortgage is paid down with community funds.
Where this occurs the community estate acquires a legal, reimbursable, interest in what would be otherwise be entirely the separate property of the titled spouse IF community funds (earnings of either spouse, for instance, or both) are used to make the mortgage payments. The idea is that joint funds are being used to benefit a separate property interest, i.e., the separate property equity. Many legal scholars consider this to be a breach of fiduciary duty - that whenever one or the other spouse's separate property interests are increased with community funds, or community time, skill, and efforts of either spouse during the marriage, the community is disadvantaged and that this disadvantage violates the statutory duties of the parties that place the party's joint interests above their separate interests.
The formula for apportionment is that the community acquires a pro tanto (dollar for dollar) interest in the ratio that principal payments on the purchase price made with community property bear to payments made with separate property. Hence, any increase in value (appreciation) must be apportioned between the separate property and the community property estates upon separation or dissolution.
Note that this only applies to separate property owned prior to marriage with a mortgage that was paid during marriage where an equity position has been increased. For instance, if a mortgage exists but it is an interest only mortgage, payments during marriage do not reduce principal. Therefore, the separate interest of the owner spouse is not improved because the debt remains exactly the same. As a general rule, the amounts paid for interest, taxes, and insurance on the house are disregarded since that portion does not to contribute to the capital investment.
Also, it assumes that the mortgage was paid with joint (community) funds, or that the funds used were so commingled that the "separatizer" is unable to trace them to a separate property source (meaning they don't have records showing where each payment was made or are unable to provide a recapitalization of the source of the funds). If your husband reduced the mortgage throughout the marriage but he did it with an account that was his separate property then the community would not have this reimbursement right.
The Moore Marsden formula requires a number of bits of information at important points in time to be properly calculated. These include:
- what was the original purchase price
- what was the original mortgage and downpayment
- what was the property worth at the date of marriage (DOM)
- what was owed to the lender at that time
- what was the property worth at the date of separation
- what was owed at that time
- what is the property worth on the date of the calculation (i.e., the trial date) and
- what is the principal pay-off at that time?
This is an example of why family law and divorce cases can become complicated and expensive. Obtaining these records, particularly if you are the 'out spouse' can be difficult, and sometimes a forensic accountant is the best option for calculating these apportionments. You need an experienced family law attorney for these types of matters.
In your case, with a lengthy marriage, you have significant Moore-Marsden entitlements. However, these may be adversely affected by the crash in the real estate market since so much equity has evaporated.
T.W. Arnold, III CFLS |
|
| Continue reading "I am not on TITLE or our HOME, but we paid the MORTGAGE for 7 years...." » |
|
| Permalink | Comments(0) |
| |
| April 08, 2010 |
| I am named in my Wife's will. If we DIVORCE does the WILL help me? |
| Posted By Thurman Arnold |
|
Q. My wife has a lot of real estate property. She put me on her Will. If we divorce, does this help me make a claim to the property?
A. Please see my other Blogs about transmutations using the onboard search engine at the upper right of this page.
Wills do not effect transmutations - meaning, they don't change the character of property from community to separate or separate to community. Your wife's Will is neither a gift to you of an interest in the property or evidence of an intent to make a gift. It doesn't help you at all. What matters is if you are actually placed on title.
However, revocable trusts sometimes do constitute transmutations (and this is a malpractice trap for estate attorneys), especially if they were created before mid-last year, when a recent appellate decision surprised some estate planning practitioners. The trust language may inadvertently have transmutedeverything placed into the trust into community property. A family law expert would need to review the language of the trust documents carefully to properly advise you.
TWA |
|
| Continue reading "I am named in my Wife's will. If we DIVORCE does the WILL help me?" » |
|
| Permalink | Comments(0) |
| |
| April 08, 2010 |
| If I put my wife on TITLE to my RESIDENCE does she get half if we DIVORCE? |
| Posted By Thurman Arnold |
|
Q. If I had my new Wife's name to my residence, do I give her half of the equity up to that point?
A. If you place your wife on title for any reason you run the risk that in the event of later divorce she will have some claim to the house, but not half.
Your question deals with the law of "transmutations"; a transmutation is a change in the character of property from separate to community property, or could include a change from community to separate property. These are complicated issues and very fact specific, so each situation (even each transaction) must be analyzed separately.
Whenever you change the form of title to a type of property that has titles (i.e., real property, automobiles, bank accounts) to add a person you run the risk of inadvertently transmuting the character of the property. People rarely intend this, but it happens quite commonly.
However, when an interspousal transfer unfairly advantages one spouse, there is a presumption that the transaction was induced by undue influence; this presumption may not apply, all other things being equal, if both parties enjoyed advantages). Marriage of Burkle (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 712. It is the burden of proof of the party who was advantaged to show that the disadvantaged spouse's action was freely and voluntarily made, with full knowledge of all the facts, and with a complete understanding of the effect of the transaction.
Marriage of Matthew (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 624.
Where a valid transmutation occurs (and deed transfers are presumptively valid), there still remains what is known as a Family Code section 2640 tracing right of reimbursement. This is a continuing separate property interest that belongs to you - assuming you do not and did not waive that reimbursement in clear separate writing. This is the separate property equity that exists as of the date of the new deed, into the future.
So, assuming on the date of marriage you place the home you received in your last divorce (btw, why are you getting remarried without a premarital agreement?) into joint tenancy with wife number 2. On that date the equity in that home is 100% yours and there is no Moore-Marsden effect to consider. Say you have $100,000 in equity.
In this simple example, absent a new transaction or a later refinance, you will continue to have a $100,000 separate property reimbursement claim in your home for all time, and in the event of a subsequent divorce, assuming at the time of the divorce sufficient evidence exists that allows you to prove the $100,000. That will typically simply consist of your mortgage balance on that date, and your testimony as to the fair market value of the property on that date (or an expert's opinion of value), with the difference being your 2640 reimbursement. You do not receive interest on that, but it does come "off the top" before the remaining equity - which would now be all community, is divided. The difference to note here is that if you had not deeded the property, it would remain your separate property subject to a Moore-Marsden reimbursement to community which usually is going to be smaller than the reverse situation.
I have written more about this in my Riverside County Family Law Blog. Use the search engine in the upper right corner of the page.
TWA
|
|
| Continue reading "If I put my wife on TITLE to my RESIDENCE does she get half if we DIVORCE?" » |
|
| Permalink |
| | |