• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

CA: To move or not to move

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

B

BarbaraSM

Guest
Husband of 10 years wants a divorce and wants me and our 17 year old daughter to move out. The house is in his name, was his before we married. I have read that leaving the home without a written legal agreement for spousal and child support could make him not liable for support. I have also read that, even though the home is not community property, the duration of the marriage and the fact that it was our family home could make the court award occupancy to me. This is an urgent question because rentals are scarce,especially decent ones, and I can't afford to rent without support. Please tell me the legal ramifications of leaving or staying ( he can't evict me, can he?)and which is the most prudent action to take.
 


I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Senior Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BarbaraSM:
Husband of 10 years wants a divorce and wants me and our 17 year old daughter to move out. The house is in his name, was his before we married. I have read that leaving the home without a written legal agreement for spousal and child support could make him not liable for support. I have also read that, even though the home is not community property, the duration of the marriage and the fact that it was our family home could make the court award occupancy to me. This is an urgent question because rentals are scarce,especially decent ones, and I can't afford to rent without support. Please tell me the legal ramifications of leaving or staying ( he can't evict me, can he?)and which is the most prudent action to take.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

Until there is a divorce, he can't evict you. He has a legal obligation to support you until there is a divorce. As to the house, the 10 years of your occupancy is, in fact, Community Property. Let's assume that the house was valued at $50,000.00 when you were married. Let's say the house is valued at $60,000.00 on the date of your divorce. You are entitled to 50% of the new valuation, or $5,000.00 - - and it makes no difference that the house is in his name.

He does not have to pay for your daughter's care, feeding, room and board. But, since you're both living there, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for him to NOT allow room and board for your daughter and you. What's he going to do? Put his food on a different shelf in the refrigerator? Nail shut your daughter's bedroom door?

If he's harrassing to you, or physical to you, or your daughter, remember to obtain a Restraining Order from the court. But, the level of harrassment or physical actions by him MUST place you or your daughter in imminent and immediate threat for your life and safety. If not, you won't get the Restraining Order.

As a general rule, for so long as spouses are married and living together, they owe each other a mutual duty of support. [Ca Fam § 4300--"Subject to this division (Ca Fam § 3500 et seq.), a person shall support the person's spouse"; see Borelli v. Brusseau (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 647, 652, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 18--"husband and wife assume mutual obligations of support upon marriage"]

Notwithstanding marital estate: The mutual spousal support duty during marriage operates independently of the parties' marital estate or financial circumstances. The parties' respective support obligations "are not conditioned on the existence of community property or income." [Borelli v. Brusseau, supra, 12 Cal.App.4th at 652, 16 Cal.Rptr.2d at 18]

Effect of living arrangements: However, the statutory spousal support duty is tied to the parties' marital cohabitation:

· "[A] person shall support the person's spouse while they are living together . . ." [Ca Fam § 4301]

· On the other hand, neither spouse owes the other a duty of support when they are living separate from each other by agreement . . . unless the agreement stipulates to continued support. [Ca Fam § 4302]

Good luck.

IAAL


------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."



[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited August 29, 2000).]
 
T

Tigres

Guest
She said "our daughter". Wouldn't that mean that the child is his? Why wouldn't he be obligated to support her as she is not 18 yet? :p

Tig

------------------
I am not a lawyer. Any information relayed is merely my own experience or research.
WARNING: I HAVE AN ATTITUDE AND I KNOW HOW TO USE IT.

"PRINCESS, HAVING HAD SUFFICIENT EXPERIENCE WITH PRINCES,SEEKS FROG."
 

LegalBeagle

Senior Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tigres:
She said "our daughter". Wouldn't that mean that the child is his? Why wouldn't he be obligated to support her as she is not 18 yet? :p
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Only a court order can force someone to support a child. Unless one is in place, he does not have to do or support anyone. However, if she claim gov ass. then the state will re-claim the amount from his and so in that sense, he will be supporting her, but after the fact.

 

I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Senior Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tigres:
She said "our daughter". Wouldn't that mean that the child is his? Why wouldn't he be obligated to support her as she is not 18 yet? :p

Tig

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

Thanks Tig. You're correct. For some reason I had the word "stepdaughter" in my head. Of course, he has a legal responsibility for support of his daughter until her age of majority.

I stand corrected.

IAAL


------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

 
B

BarbaraSM

Guest
Thank you Tigres and IAAL for your response to my posting. It was a relief to hear that my 10 years of work and money gone into this place will be valued by the court and that I don't have to "beg" for it. Have you heard of the Moore Marsden decision? I believe it concerns that kind of interest in a property, but I can't find any details about it. Yes, the daughter is "ours" - mine by birth, his by adoption. So I do think he is obligated for support until she is 18 or graduates High School. That statute about him not being liable for support if we don't live with him is scary, so I'm trying to draft a temporary separation agreement with him that guarantees support until a final legal decision is made.
 

I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Senior Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BarbaraSM:
Thank you Tigres and IAAL for your response to my posting. It was a relief to hear that my 10 years of work and money gone into this place will be valued by the court and that I don't have to "beg" for it. Have you heard of the Moore Marsden decision? I believe it concerns that kind of interest in a property, but I can't find any details about it. Yes, the daughter is "ours" - mine by birth, his by adoption. So I do think he is obligated for support until she is 18 or graduates High School. That statute about him not being liable for support if we don't live with him is scary, so I'm trying to draft a temporary separation agreement with him that guarantees support until a final legal decision is made.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My response:

NO, NO, NO, NO.

DO NOT DO THIS ON YOUR OWN. FOR THE LOUSY $300.00 it might cost, get an attorney to draft a separation agreement. DO NOT DO THIS BECAUSE A 3-YEAR-OLD WOULD PROBABLY BE ABLE TO "PUNCH HOLES" IN IT.

An interesting twist on the Moore/Marsden principles occurred where a community property home was converted to H's separate property during marriage by W's quitclaim deed. The spouses had separated at the time of the transaction but thereafter reconciled and continued making loan payments with community funds.

Although the reconciliation did not ipso facto nullify the quitclaim deed (the home remained H's separate property), the community payments gave the community a pro tanto interest in the home (per Moore/Marsden). However, in this situation, only those community payments made after execution of the deed are considered; whatever interest the community might have acquired by making payments prior to execution of the deed were transferred to H as his SP by the quitclaim deed. [See Marriage of Broderick (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d 489, 257 Cal.Rptr. 397; compare Marriage of Stoner (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 858, 864, 195 Cal.Rptr. 351, 355--H's permissive use of CP to pay off loan on CP quitclaimed to W deemed a gift, hence no CP interest]

"[W]hen, prior to marriage, spouses each contributed separate property funds to purchase real property, with title taken in both names as tenants in common, and payments after marriage are made with community funds, the correct method to calculate the separate and community interests of the parties upon dissolution is the same method as when the property is the separate property of only one spouse and payments after marriage are made with community property funds, that method generally known as the Moore-Marsden rule." [Marriage of Rico, supra, 10 Cal.App.4th at 708, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d at 660 (first emphasis added)]

SP equity interests calculated as of conversion date: Following Moore/Marsden, the spouses' respective SP equity interests in the home as of the conversion date are the percentage of the purchase price represented by the respective contributions for purchase and improvements. Those percentages are then applied to the appreciation in value as of the conversion date; and the resulting sums are added to the contributions for purchase and improvements to determine the full extent of the parties' unequal separate interests in the residence as of the conversion date. [Marriage of Rico, supra, 10 Cal.App.4th at 710-711, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d at 661]

A strict application of the Moore/Marsden measure of reimbursement normally also requires an apportionment of principal reduction of the mortgage as a result of using separate property funds to make mortgage payments. However, where (as in Rico) the parties made equal monthly payments, such calculations are unnecessary. [Marriage of Rico, supra, 10 Cal.App.4th at 711, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d at 661 & fn. 1--implied finding that payments reducing principal balance before marriage were made either from joint funds or on behalf of both parties (also noting "obviously, payments made after marriage were from community earnings and were attributable equally to each of the parties")]

"The same result was achieved by the court's equal disbursement of sums remaining from the sale of the residence after the parties had been reimbursed their respective separate property interests." [Marriage of Rico, supra]

IAAL




------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

 
I

I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Guest
Here's a couple of EXAMPLE marital separation Agreements. Read them, and HAVE THEM CHECKED BY YOUR ATTORNEY, FIRST!!!


MARITAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on ..........., at Santa Barbara, California, by and between MARY L. GEORGE, (referred to herein as "Wife") and ROBERT P. GEORGE (referred to herein as "Husband"), both referred to collectively as "The Parties," and is based upon the following facts which the parties agree to be true:

A. The parties were married to each other on ........, ..... in San Diego, California, and have been husband and wife continuously since that date. The parties separated on ........, ..... [OR: "The parties have actually separated and ceased marital relations except as set forth in this Agreement, but they have continued to reside in and both claim their principal residence to be the family home located at 423 S. Escondido Road, Santa Barbara, California."]

B. The parties are the parents of two minor children: a son, Robert P. George, Jr., born ........, ....., and a daughter, Glenna Elsa George, born .........., ...... The parties have had no other children of the marriage and have not adopted any children.

C. Irreconcilable differences have arisen between the parties which have led to the irremediable breakdown of their marriage. The parties agree that no further waiting period, marriage counseling, or conciliation efforts would save the marriage, and the parties have filed for [OR: "intend to file for"] dissolution of their marriage. The proceeding is pending in [OR: "will be filed in"] the Superior Court of the County of Santa Barbara, Case NO. 45,876, with Wife, Petitioner, and Husband, Respondent.

D. The parties intend this Agreement to be a final and complete settlement of all of their rights and obligations as between them, including property rights and property claims, the right of either Wife or Husband to spousal support, and the right of Wife to receive support for the minor children, subject to continuing jurisdiction of the Superior Court to order support for the minor children.

[OR, in those cases where some provisions are to be determined by the court: "The parties intend this Agreement to be a final and complete settlement of all their rights and obligations as between them regarding their community property interests, but the amount and duration of spousal support for Wife and child support for the minor children shall be determined by the court in the dissolution proceeding."]

E. The parties are presently both in good health, and neither has any known illness, disability or physical condition which renders either incapable of gainful employment or makes either subject to extraordinary medical or dental expenditures in the near future.

F. Husband is presently employed by Heywood Advertising Agency, and his earnings are solely those shown as wages from his employer on last year's Federal Income Tax return in the sum of $78,575 gross for that year, and $51,500 after tax and employee deductions.

G. Wife has not been employed outside the home since the date of the parties' marriage, but she was employed before the marriage as a medical secretary for Kaiser Medical Clinic and is presently employable in that occupation.

H. There is other income derived from community property of the parties which has been divided by the terms of this Agreement, and both parties are fully advised and agree as to the nature and amount of such income.

THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, including, without limitation, the mutual promises, conditions and agreements set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. Effective Date: This Agreement shall be and become effective as of the date of its execution as set forth on the first page of this Agreement.

[OR: "This Agreement shall be and become effective only on the date it is approved by the court in the pending dissolution proceeding. If not approved in its entirety by the court, this Agreement shall not become effective until thereafter ratified in a signed writing by both parties in the form finally approved by the court."]

[OR: "This Agreement shall be and become effective only after approval by the court in the pending dissolution proceeding and on the date that a final judgment of dissolution is entered in the judgment book."]

2. Independent Counsel: The parties acknowledge and agree that they each have been represented by separate and independent legal counsel and have relied on counsel of their own choosing at all stages of the negotiation, preparation and drafting of this Agreement. Each party further acknowledges that this Agreement has carefully been read by each respectively, has been explained to each by their respective counsel, and that each party fully understands the contents and legal effect.

[OR: "The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement was prepared by the attorney for Wife and that Husband was not represented by legal counsel. Husband acknowledges that he has been advised to obtain independent legal counsel, that he has voluntarily refused to consult with any attorney, that he has read and understands the contents and legal effect of this Agreement and has entered into it and signed it freely and voluntarily, and that he waives any right to rescind or set aside this Agreement except upon a finding that there has been an actual misrepresentation, knowingly made with intent to defraud."]

3. Voluntary and Informed Consent: The parties further acknowledge and agree that that they enter into this Agreement voluntarily, free from duress, fraud, undue influence, coercion, or misrepresentation or any kind.

4. Division of Community Property: The property itemized in Exhibits "A" and "B" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference is a complete list of all of the community [and quasi-community] property of the parties. The status of some items was disputed, but has now been agreed upon between the parties as set forth herein. Husband hereby transfers to Wife as her sole and separate property all of the property set forth in Exhibit "A". Wife hereby transfers to Husband as his sole and separate property all of the property set forth in Exhibit "B". The parties have made the transfers set forth in
this paragraph with the intent that such transfers constitute an equal division of their community [and quasi-community ] property.

5. Division of Other Jointly Owned Property: The parties presently own undivided one-half interests each in the joint tenancy real property described in Exhibit "E" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference. These joint tenancy interests shall be severed with the effective date of this Agreement and the parties will thereafter hold their interests therein as tenants in common.

6. Confirmation of Separate Property Interests: The property listed in Exhibit "C" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference was and is the separate property of Wife, and Husband confirms such property to Wife and waives any claim of interest therein. The property listed in Exhibit "D" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference was and is the separate property of Husband, and Wife confirms such property to Husband and waives any claim of interest therein.

7. Separate Property Interests in Husband's Pension Plan; Wife's Waiver of Rights: Husband presently owns a substantial beneficial interest in the Heywood Advertising Agency defined contribution pension plan. Wife acknowledges and agrees that pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, the pension funds presently held for the benefit of Husband listed in Exhibit "D" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference are his separate property, together with any and all income, interest, appreciation and increase of such funds.

Wife has been informed by her counsel and understands that pursuant to federal law, or the terms of Husband's defined contribution pension plan documentation, that s
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top