Husband has further shares that have not vested yet- will I receive half?

[eileens]

We are from California and have been married for 5 years with 1 child. My husband has received "shares" of a fund that will return in apprx 7 years from now. Since he was given the shares during his marriage to me, will I have rights to have of the payout 7 yeARS from now? Will I have rights to either sell back to him, keep, etc or will that be considered his since they will not vest until a future date when we will no longer be together? Any input is greatly appreciated.

 

[tranquility]

We are from California and have been married for 5 years with 1 child. My husband has received "shares" of a fund that will return in apprx 7 years from now. Since he was given the shares during his marriage to me, will I have rights to have of the payout 7 yeARS from now? Will I have rights to either sell back to him, keep, etc or will that be considered his since they will not vest until a future date when we will no longer be together? Any input is greatly appreciated.

It depends. For the original case on the matter, see In re marriage of Hug. It gets complex very fast.

http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/154/780.html

The main competing yet complimentary theory is In re marriage of Nelson.

http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/177/150.html

 

[LdiJ]

We are from California and have been married for 5 years with 1 child. My husband has received "shares" of a fund that will return in apprx 7 years from now. Since he was given the shares during his marriage to me, will I have rights to have of the payout 7 yeARS from now? Will I have rights to either sell back to him, keep, etc or will that be considered his since they will not vest until a future date when we will no longer be together? Any input is greatly appreciated.

What was the source of the shares in question? If it was a family gift or something like that then no, you would not be entitled to any portion of it. Gifts are separate property.

If it had to do with compensation from his employment, then see Tranq's response.

 

[tranquility]

What was the source of the shares in question? If it was a family gift or something like that then no, you would not be entitled to any portion of it. Gifts are separate property.

If it had to do with compensation from his employment, then see Tranq's response.

I had Hug as a brief in law school (Community Property assigned cases.) and created a spreadsheet and a MS Publication on the process. The professor uses both as a resource to classes he now teaches. (Lousy law school, no doubt. Worst tier of acceptance.Just saying.)

EVEN WITH THE MATH ONE CAN CALCULATE between the interaction between the cases and life, the real answer is what is fair. I only add this because LdiJ's response has me remember things. For a moment, a very long time ago, I figured myself a top expert in the particular question. Times change, I have not specifically followed case law and, do not have many real facts to make a claim. Certainly, without any doubt, if the shares were a gift where the OP/spouse did no work in a capital-type situation, the husband has nothing that devolves to the OP. To me, it seems the "shares" (whatever that means) are a result of work by the husband. If so, read the cases.

They are hard. But, if you read them again and again, you get it. It's kinda fair. It is the way it should be. However, other cases decide differently based on facts that seem indistinguishable. The real issue is to argue what SHOULD be done. You can tilt it towards the law if you want. What should be done is the real answer.

So, it depends.

 

[eileens]

The options/shares received were through work, not through family, personal, etc. I was under the impression that since I'm a SAHM (and left my career to raise my child) that any of the options/shares received would be communal property once they vest (even if we are no longer together). But it sounds like there is differing opinion and not a hard and fast rule. I tried to read the cases but got lost fast- yes, it does get complicated! Does anyone have any idea which way the court typically leans?

 

[LdiJ]

The options/shares received were through work, not through family, personal, etc. I was under the impression that since I'm a SAHM (and left my career to raise my child) that any of the options/shares received would be communal property once they vest (even if we are no longer together). But it sounds like there is differing opinion and not a hard and fast rule. I tried to read the cases but got lost fast- yes, it does get complicated! Does anyone have any idea which way the court typically leans?

Honestly, the courts generally do not lean in your favor. Vesting is not guaranteed and there are many things that can stop vesting from happening. Your odds would be greater if the vesting was something that might happen quickly, rather than something that won't happen for another 7 years.

 

[tranquility]

The options/shares received were through work, not through family, personal, etc. I was under the impression that since I'm a SAHM (and left my career to raise my child) that any of the options/shares received would be communal property once they vest (even if we are no longer together). But it sounds like there is differing opinion and not a hard and fast rule. I tried to read the cases but got lost fast- yes, it does get complicated! Does anyone have any idea which way the court typically leans?

There are some simplistic thoughts out there. I don't agree with the conclusions, but I might start with a Hug + Nelson + California search. You might find something that helps.