After 13 years, we are going through a divorce. Before we were married, we began looking for property to purchase. After looking at several properties, she found a property and entered into escrow, using the excuse that because of her job, she could get an huge discount if it was in her name. I liked the house and we moved forward with me paying the down payment at closing (which I can't prove except her declaring that in a letter). We moved in it together and were engaged in 45 days. We both paid the mortgage (it was deducted from her acct which I deposited into) and married 7 mos later. For 10 yrs, 2.5 of which, my wife was a stay at home Mom, I paid the lions share of our expenses. Now my wife is claiming I have no interest the 200,000 equity in the home. Only she is on title.
Child Custody Lawyer
Title does not determine whether you have an interest in the equity. If payments were made during the marriage with earnings (from either party) then you most certainly do have an Interest in the equity and may be entitled to reimbursement of the down payment as well.
2 lawyers agree
Real Estate Attorney
Your case is not a Marvin case. Your case involves a determination of separate vs. community property as well as reimbursement issues. You need an experienced Family Law attorney.
DISCLAIMER: This answer is provided solely for informational purposes only. This answer does not constitute legal advice, create an attorney-client relationship, or constitute attorney advertising. Liewen Law is fully compliant with every State and Federal Law, including California SB 94 and the related Civil Code Sections, as well as the FTC Mortgage Assistance Relief Services (MARS) Final Rule. Liewen Law is a debt relief agency helping consumers file for bankruptcy relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code. Liewen Law maintains this website for marketing and informational purposes only. None of the information or materials on this site is legal advice. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. Said information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. While we make every effort to keep this site accurate and up to date, we do not guarantee its accuracy and are not responsible for inaccuracies, errors, or omissions.
3 lawyers agree
Family Law Attorney
Your facts are "interesting" because they seem to track some of the elements of the case, Brooks v. Robinson. "Interesting" is a bad thing, since it may mean that your wife could have an argument. I think you should talk with a competent Family Law attorney.
As stated above -- I have NOT actually stated any legal opinion, because I need to know more before I can start to form one.
Securities / Investment Fraud Attorney
This is a very INTRESTING case. You case is not a Marvin case. You definitely need someone that understands financial issues economics accounting good faith bad faith by spouse and even fraudr
Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as a legal advice on any subject. No recipients of content from this site,clients or otherwise,should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the recipient's state. The content of this website contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. The Karamanlis Powers Law Offices expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this website, weblogs, twitter, facebook, google+.