Published by admin on

Here, Husband insist that the house is
community property because the house was built on the land which was clearly
community property. Wife assert that he already agreed that the house was
separate property and he didn’t contribute to construct the house. furthermore,
the title of the house was named of the Wife. Husband rebut that in the case of
Marriage of Smith, when Mrs. Smith used her own money (separate property) to swimming
pool (community property), The Court held that her own money was included to
community property. Wife contend that in Smith case, there was an evidence that
Mrs. Smith intended to give her own money as a gift. Furthermore, there was no
reimbursement clause like this case. Husband made another issue, which Wife didn’t
deserve to get the present value of the house. Husband insist that Wife must
take only the money $46,668 which she invested. The Court held that the house
was separate property of Wife because there was substantial evidence that Wife continuously
hold her opinion that the house owned by herself even though Husband was not
happy with that. The Court also decided to apply apportionment to the community
(when Wife built the house, the land value was $17,000, the house value:
$46,668. The apportionment was 17,000: 46,668. The present land and house value
was $87,000. The present land value was (87,000 x 17000/(17,000+46,668))

Categories: Marriage


I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out