separate property Archives - Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri

Posts

10 Common Divorce Questions

September 6, 2019/in Family Law /by Gretchen Boger

Divorce is very nuanced. There are many things to consider which can make an already difficult situation more challenging. Lonich Patton Ehlich Policastri has put together a comprehensive guide of the most commonly asked questions. Get an answer to your divorce question now.

1.What Is The Difference Between Divorce Mediation And Divorce Collaboration?

Mediation is when a neutral third party is hired to facilitate resolution of issues between two people during a divorce. The mediator helps with paperwork, mutual communication between all parties, and securing 60%-70% of goals or desires are met for each party.

Collaboration is a binding contract between both parties and their attorneys stating neither will go to court. If this contract is breached, the parties will have to fire their attorneys and start the process over. Attorneys can help clients identify what’s important to them and how to work through issues. It is common to have non lawyer professionals involved in collaborative divorce. Mental health professionals, divorce coaches and financial specials can add clarity to emotions and difficulties that arise during the resolution of a marriage.

2. How Much Does It Cost To Get Divorced?

This is probably the most common divorce question. The answer is different for everyone. It depends on what issues you have. Do you have children? If so, you will need to deal with the issue of custody. How will your property be divided? Do you own a business together? What if one of you needs spousal support? Is there a post nuptial or a prenuptial agreement? All of these factors impact the cost of your divorce. The best way to find out what cost you’re looking at is to call an attorney. If you live in San Jose, Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri offers a free 30 minute consultation that can answer tough questions like this.

3. How Long Will A Divorce Take?

The answer for this divorce question is similar to the question above. It depends on your unique situation. The attorney you work with will need to know of any estate plans, businesses or property you and your spouse own. They will also need to consider any children and custody agreements involved. It depends on how much you and your spouse agree upon. If you go through mediation or collaboration, it could take less time than going through litigation.

4. How Is Property Divided In A Divorce?

In California, this comes down to two rules: Community property and Separate property. Separate property is anything you acquired before your marriage and that hasn’t been commingled or shared between the two parties during the marriage. If you owned a house before your marriage and have kept it separate from community property, that is added to your separate income when division begins.

An attorney answers the burning divorce question of how property is divided after divorce.

Community property is anything acquired during the marriage or shared during the marriage. This includes a family home, cars, debts or anything earned or gifted during the marriage. Community property is divided during the dissolution of the marriage. This doesn’t mean it is necessarily divided in half. If you have two assets of equal value, one person may receive one while the other party receives the other; an example being a house and a retirement savings plan.

5. What Are My Rights During A Divorce?

You have rights protected under the Bill of Rights. You have the right to a fair trial; the right to a safe trial free of harassment from a spouse or their attorney. You have the right to see your child unless a court states otherwise. Speaking with an experienced attorney such as the ones at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri is the best way to learn about your rights during your divorce. Get your questions answered in a free 30 minute consultation.

6. How Does The Court Decide On Child Custody During A Divorce?

Child custody is decided based on many factors. Often, during the case, temporary custody is assigned. This allows the child to have a stable routine they can depend upon and prevents their lives from being upended. Judges can be hesitant to change this plan when deciding on permanent custody as they don’t want to remove that stability from the child’s life. Temporary custody can be an indicator of the end result of child custody, but it isn’t guaranteed. Once divorce is filed, the state your child currently resides in becomes their home state. If a parent wants to move out of the state or relocate, this can affect the outcome as well.

Judges consider the wellbeing of the child over everything else. This means they will look into any history of mental illness, drug abuse or addiction, and financial stability (to name a few). Courts tend to favor the spouse who is able to put their differences and issues from the divorce aside for the betterment of the child. This means the more level headed you are, the better.

7. Does My State Have A Separation Requirement?

This is a crucial divorce question to research before filing. In San Jose, CA, there is no separation requirement. You must have lived in CA for 6 months before filing for divorce however. Once you have filed, you must wait another 6 months before the finalization of your divorce. If you file for legal separation in the state of California, there is no waiting period making it a great option for those who haven’t lived in the state for 6 months.

If you don’t know if your state has a separation requirement, the best way to find out is to research your state laws or contact a local divorce attorney.

8. How Do I File For Divorce?

This is another common divorce question clients ask. To be eligible for a divorce in CA, you must have lived in the state for 6 months. When it comes to counties, you must have lived in the specific county you file in for 3 months.

Before no fault divorce existed, a spouse had to provide a reason for the dissolution of marriage. This typically involves extramarital affairs or domestic violence and the practice is still common in some states. In California, all divorces are no fault which means one party can simply want a divorce from the other without providing a “fault.” This means that wrongdoing has no impact on the division of assets according to the judge.

After filing, there’s a 6 month waiting period for the finalization of divorce. You and your spouse can work collaboratively to make a plan for child custody and property division without legal assistance and if that doesn’t work you can seek help from a mediator. This is where you might consider collaborative divorce or mediation. The last option is divorce litigation which is also the messiest. This should be a last option if you and your spouse cannot agree on anything.

For help filing in Santa Clara county, contact Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.

9. Will I Have To Go To Court?

You may not need to go to court if you are able to resolve issues and division of assets through mediation or collaboration. This is an ideal situation and all papers can be filed with the court with a judgement on your case sent in the mail. Sometimes you may still be required to show up for a hearing in these cases.

Proper divorce planning and mediation can help you avoid going to court.

If you opt for divorce litigation, the matter will be handled in court and this can be pricey. If you can avoid litigation, it’s in the best interest of everyone involved. However, at LPEP Law, they know how contentious divorces can get and understand not everyone will be able to settle their issues out of court.

10. How Do I Decide On A Divorce Lawyer?

You should make sure your divorce attorney specializes in family law and divorce cases. You want someone who has handled a myriad of divorce situations and will work to get you the best possible outcome.

Ask how many years of experience they have. If you’re going to court, do they know the court and the judges who preside there? Are they board certified? These are all important questions to ask when deciding on a lawyer.

If you’re considering divorce in San Jose, contact Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri for a free 30 minute consultation. They can help you decide if mediation, collaboration or litigation is the right option for you. Get any divorce question you have answered.

How Is Property Divided After Divorce?

September 6, 2019/in Family Law /by Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri

Financial issues following a separation can be complicated. Proper divorce planning and record-keeping can be invaluable to a smooth divorce proceeding. Determining what is community property and what is separate personal property can become complicated very easily. For example, you may ask “What happens to my house after divorce?”

Seemingly simple issues such as who stays in the community home and who pays the mortgage after separation carry significant weight. To assist in these issues, Epstein Credits and Watts Charges are used.

Epstein Credits And Community Property

In 1979, the case Marriage of Epstein gave the court the power to order Epstein Credits. Epstein Credits are used to determine the amount one spouse will be reimbursed for debts paid after separation but before trial. Epstein Credits allow a spouse who pays community expenses or debt after separation to be reimbursed for their one-half share of the expense or debt. An example of this is a mortgage on a community property home. This does not apply to separate personal property.

An attorney signs paperwork dividing community property in a divorce

When requesting Epstein Credits, it is important to keep accurate records. Records should include the expenses or debts made and from what sources the expenses or debts were paid from. The more extensive the records kept, the easier it will be to determine what reimbursement may be made from Epstein Credits. Proper divorce planning can assure you have all the records you need to proceed with this process. Further it is important to raise the issue of Epstein Credits as early as possible. This helps to avoid extra complexity at trial.

Watts Charges And Community Property

The case Marriage of Watts in 1985 introduced the concept of Watts Charges, allowing a spouse to charge the other spouse for the use of a community asset after separation. While Watts Charges can apply to almost any community asset, a common situation that arises after separation is that one spouse will remain in the community owned home exclusively. When one spouse remains in the community home the other spouse may charge that spouse one-half of the community home’s fair monthly rental value.

Courts prefer that prior written notice of the intent to seek Watts Charges be given. This notice simplifies issues at trial. It makes it known that Watts Charges are within the reasonable expectations of the spouses. Like Epstein Credits, the earlier that a claim for Watts Charges are raised the better. The claim will be retroactive to when written notice was given.

Epstein and Watts Together

In some circumstances, Epstein Credits and Watts Charges may partially or even completely offset each other. If a spouse is both living in the community home and paying the mortgage, if the mortgage payment is equal to the value of the monthly rent, the two will offset each other. If however if the value of the rent is higher than the mortgage payment, the difference in value will still be owed to the respective spouse. It is also possible to owe both Epstein Credits and Watts Charges. Consider if a spouse is living in the community home, and the other spouse is paying the mortgage for the property. In this case, the spouse living in the home may owe both the one-half rent and the one-half payment of the mortgage.

An experienced attorney sitting with a client helping to divide up community property in a divorce.

Regardless of the circumstances surrounding separation and community property, these financial issues are complex. They are best addressed by a knowledgeable and experienced attorney. If you are separated or looking at a high net worth divorce, please contact one of the experienced attorneys at Lonich, Patton, Ehrlich, Policastri. They offer a 30 minute free consultation where they can assist you with divorce planning and answer any questions you may have.

Please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Educational Degrees and Divorce

May 24, 2017/in Family Law /by Michael Lonich

More individuals today have received some sort of professional degree or training than ever before. But with the influx of costs for higher education many married students rely on their spouse for financial support. And upon legal separation or divorce a spouse who supported the other through their education may be entitled to reimbursement for their community fund contributions.

If a spouse chooses to obtain a professional degree or training during their marriage usually two events occur. First, the non-student spouse supports the other financially by paying for the community and educational expenses. Second, after the education is complete, community funds may be used to repay any outstanding loan amount. Upon legal separation or divorce in California these educational loans will be assigned to the spouse who received the education or training and the non-student spouse may have a right to reimbursement for their community contributions. However, California does not recognize an obtained degree or training as community property and therefore its value cannot be divisible upon divorce.

The reimbursement for community fund contributions to a spouse’s education or training is an exclusive remedy governed by Family Code Section 2641. But the spouse seeking reimbursement has a burden to trace the funds to a community property source such as earnings acquired during the marriage. Reimbursement is seen to give a fair “quid pro quo” (this for that) of the community’s investment in the education of a spouse. A supporting spouse may receive reimbursement if the education or training “substantially enhanced” the earning capacity of the spouse or the marriage has ended before the community obtains a benefit from such education. Contributions that may be reimbursed involve payments made with community or quasi-community property to support the student spouse’s education expenditures. These expenses include: tuition, fees, books, supplies, transportation, and directly related educational expenses. However, a spouse will not receive reimbursement for ordinary living expenses since these would have been incurred regardless of a spouse’s educational expedition.

Full reimbursement is not guaranteed though and a court may choose to impose limitations on a spouse’s reimbursement amount if their case’s circumstances warrant such a decision. There are several reasons for a limitation and the ones listed below are by no means exhaustive, but merely illustrative.

A person embarks on an advanced degree or training for a multitude of reasons, one of which may be for better financial standing. Yet, even though there is an expectation that the education will benefit the marital community there is no presumption that the enhancement will be “substantial.” Thus, if a spouse cannot demonstrate the education received in fact substantially enhanced the earning capacity, then reimbursement may be limited.

“Unjust reimbursement” can also limit reimbursement. This occurs when a court determines specific circumstances within a case renders a full reimbursement of the community contributions unfair. For example, if both spouses have obtained a degree or training at the community’s expense a reimbursement to only one would be unjust since both were at one point supported by the other. Unjust reimbursement may also occur when a spouse receives education or training that substantially reduces their need for spousal support. These examples however are merely illustrative and many other circumstances may lead a court to deem full reimbursement to a spouse as unjust.

Finally, a written agreement between the spouses that waives or modifies a reimbursement right may limit a spouse’s amount receivable. Such a waiver or modification must be written expressly; it cannot be agreed upon orally or implied and must be signed by the adverse party.

The achievement of obtaining a degree or training is rewarding for all involved. However, upon legal separation or divorce, rights to reimbursement for community contributions can become complex. If you are considering a divorce or legal separation and would like more information about divorce and educational reimbursement, please contact the experienced family law attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri.

Lastly, please remember that each individual situation is unique, and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

How SB 1255 (the “anti-Davis legislation”) Will Impact Your “Date of Separation”

August 29, 2016/3 Comments/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Currently divorcing spouses or couples considering divorce better consult a lawyer soon—a newly enacted statute has changed the method by which California courts determine a married couple’s “date of separation.” On July 25, 2016, the governor of California, Jerry Brown, signed SB 1255 (aka the “anti-Davis legislation”), a bill which amends California Family Code § 771 and adds section 70 to the Family Code. As a result, the existing standard that governs a married couple’s “date of separation” has been changed. Previously, Family Code § 771 instructed that spouses were not separated until they were “living separate and apart”—a phrase which courts interpreted to mean “living in separate residences.” With the passing of SB 1255 though, spouses may now be considered “separated” even if they share a common residence.

A couple’s legal “date of separation” is important because it determines the point at which a spouse’s earnings and accumulations are no longer considered “community property” and instead, are considered a spouse’s own “separate property.” In turn, the difference between community and separate property is important because absent a written agreement stating otherwise, all community property must be evenly divided between divorcing spouses.

SB 1255’s nickname—the “anti-Davis legislation”—came about because of the case its creation abrogates: In re Marriage of Davis. In July 2015, the Davis court held that “living in separate residences ‘is an indispensable threshold requirement’ for a finding that spouses are ‘living separate and apart,’” or in other words, for determining a “date of separation.” However, the Davis court didn’t create new law—it merely affirmed what it believed was the California legislature’s intention when it coined the phrase “living separate and apart” many years ago.

To ascertain the legislature’s intent, the Davis court had to do go back 146 years to 1870 when the phrase was first used in a statute that protected the rights of married women. Similarly to section 771, the 1870 Act did not define “living separate and apart.” However, according to the Davis court, section four of the 1870 Act suggests that the legislature intended for the phrase to require separate residences: a wife, who was “living separate and apart” from her husband and wished to sell her real property without joining her husband, had to record a declaration that included a description of “her own place of residence” and a statement that “she is a married woman, living separate and apart from her husband.”

Additionally, when the California legislature repealed a number of Family Code sections in 1969, it created a new statute (section 5118) that reproduced the 1870 Act language. Once again though, the legislature provided no specific definition of “living separate and apart.” The Davis court reasoned that the legislature’s continued use of the phrase—without defining it—expressed its satisfaction with earlier judicial interpretation of the language.

Further, the Davis court also relied on a notable 2002 case—In re Marriage of Norviel—which concluded that “living apart physically is an indispensable threshold requirement to separation, whether or not it is sufficient, by itself, to establish separation.” Therefore, relying on legislative history and case law, the Davis court affirmed the Norviel holding—spouses had to live in separate residences before they could be considered separated.

While the Norviel and Davis courts may have correctly discerned the original meaning of “living separate and apart,” our modern legislature took issue with their holdings and in response, passed SB 1255. The bill expressly abrogates Norviel and Davis, and rather than provide a specific definition for “living separate and apart,” the legislature did away with the phrase all together. Instead, section 771 (the modern statute that contained the disputed language) now uses the phrase “after the date of separation” to determine when a spouse’s accumulations and earnings transition from “community” to “separate” property. In turn, newly added section 70 defines “date of separation” as a “complete and final break” that is evidenced by two factors: 1) a spouse has expressed his or her intent to end the marriage to the other spouse, and 2) the conduct of the spouse is consistent with his or her intent to end the marriage. Further, section 70 requires that a court look at all “relevant evidence” when making the above determination.

This statutory change was spurred on by Senator John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa), the author of SB 1255. He believed it was necessary to change the Family Code language because many spouses wish to separate legally in order to protect their personal finances, but also, wish to continue sharing a residence in order to save costs during their divorce. Thus, SB 1255 should better reflect the reality of modern divorce experiences.

While the amended Family Code sections do provide clarity and allow couples more post-separation flexibility, it is important to note that SB 1255 may not be the end of legal disputes about separation dates—in the coming years, case law will further refine section 70. Additionally, couples in the process of a divorce should not let SB 1255 pass by them unnoticed because when the new law goes into effect on January 1, 2017, it may retroactively apply to any cases pending on that date, but this issue still needs to be resolved and addressed by the Family Courts in California. Look for another blog post on this topic specifically. However, consulting now with your attorney to develop a “date of separation” strategy is in your best interest.

If you are considering a legal separation or divorce, please contact the experienced family law attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri—we can help you navigate the effects of SB 1255 and answer any questions you may have about how the new law will impact your divorce. The sooner you understand how SB 1255 will affect your current or impending legal plans, the better you can prepare for the new rule when it goes into to effect on January 1, 2017.

Sources:

2016 Cal. Legis. Serv. Ch. 114 (S.B. 1255)

In re Marriage of Davis (2015) 61 Cal.4th 846

In re Marriage of Norviel (2002) 102.Cal.App.4th 1152

Fiduciary Duties Between Spouses: Respect Thy Spouse

June 19, 2012/1 Comment/in Family Law /by Gina Policastri

Husband uses wife’s private shopper and bank account to purchase $1.4 million worth of luxury goods from Neiman Marcus. Wife is bedridden the entire time recovering from a traffic accident. Private shopper is having sexual relations with husband, and earns a commission off of the sales. Neiman Marcus is reportedly refusing to return the goods. (See http://abcn.ws/KsRBy8.) Does wife have any legal recourse for the purchases she did not participate in? This true story is one extreme example of how spouses can breach the fiduciary duties they owe to each other.

Under the California Family Code, spouses are treated much like business partners and must deal fairly and in good faith with each other. The fiduciary duties require an “accurate and complete” disclosure of all transactions and provide that spouses share equal management and control of their community property. These duties are subject to few exceptions and the consequences for breaching them can be severe. If you find yourself on either side of a breach of fiduciary duty claim, the experienced attorneys at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri can assist you in determining your rights, obligations and exposure.

The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex family law matters. If you are interested in learning more about your fiduciary rights and obligations, contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri for further information. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may detail general legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

What Happens to Out-of-State Real Property Upon a Divorce in California?

January 11, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

Upon a divorce, it is often a complicated and challenging process to divide real property existing in another state. The correct treatment of an out of state home or piece of land depends on how the property is characterized under California community property law. Generally, most property acquired during marriage is considered community property. At divorce, community property is divided equally between spouses. However, property acquired during marriage while living in a non-community property state is not community property. To find out what happens to this out of state real property, it is best to look at an example.

Let’s assume you and your spouse meet, marry, and reside in non-community property state. While married, you purchase a home with the savings you both earned during your marriage. Now, let’s assume, your spouse gets a job in California and you relocated without selling your home. Years later, you file for divorce. Under California law, this property is not community property as it was not acquired in a community property state. Instead, this property is characterized as “quasi-community property.”

Quasi-community property is property (wherever located) that would have been community property if the spouses had acquired it while domiciled in California. In a California divorce proceeding, quasi-community property will be treated the same as community property. Thus, in the above example, the out of state home would be divided the same way as if it were located in California. If located in California, the home would have been considered community property as it was acquired during marriage with martial earnings. It is important to remember that California community property law is complex, and it is filled with numerous exceptions.

For more information on how your property would be characterized under California law, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

“He Wants What?!” – The Basics of California Community Property Law

January 6, 2011/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

Did you just find out that your husband or wife wants ownership of a special piece of personal property or real estate that you acquired before you were married? If so, you should be aware of some basic rules in California family law.

First, California is a community property state. This means that all property acquired by spouses during marriage while living in California is presumed to be community property. However, property that is acquired during marriage by gift, bequest, or devise, or income from property acquired prior to marriage is presumed to be separate property of the receiving spouse. In addition, all property acquired by each spouse prior to marriage is presumptively the property of the owner spouse. Thus, if your spouse is currently twisting your arm to give you possession of a valuable asset you acquired before marriage, your spouse may not have any legal claim to this property.

However, under certain circumstances, your spouse may have a claim in your separate property. For example, if you owned a home before marriage but community funds were used during the marriage to pay down the mortgage, the community may have an interest in the home. In addition, if you purchased real estate or personal property during marriage with your separate property but agreed with your spouse in writing that you were converting this property into community property; your spouse may also have an interest in the asset.

For more information on California community property law, please contact us. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.