Married 33 yrs and live in house that is in a trust with Mother in law as the title holder of property. She passed and left the house in a trust for him. He says he doesn't have to split the house with her if they get divorced. Is this true even after 33 years of marriage and over 20 years in the house?
Generally, if separate property and ultimately no community contributions by you, then no obligation and thus no exposure to divorce proceedings. California law defines community property as any asset acquired or income earned by a married person while living with a spouse. Separate property is defined as anything acquired by a spouse before the marriage, during the marriage by gift, devise, or bequest, and after the parties separate. However I'd consult with a lawyer to review all documents and surrounding circumstances in person--don't rely solely on information from this forum as a "quick-fix" resolution.
DISCLAIMER: Please be advised that this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information provided by WFB Legal Consulting is disseminated for educational purposes only, and is not to be construed as legal advice. Do not take any action, postpone any action, or decline to take any proposed action based on this information without first engaging the representation of a licensed attorney at law in your State of residence.
Your post on this website does not explain enough facts that may be helpful to your cause of action, so please see a PROBATE LTIGATION ATTORNEY with all your facts (and care management issues/schedule) to obtain a viable summary about your possible options. Possibly the information or facts can support various options presented by Attorney Jeremy Ofseyer, Esq. in his article drafting split interest gifts in the current issue of the T&E article of the Cal Bar.
An Attorney consultation ~ with candor and confidentiality ~ can result in specific legal advice about your situation (and its documents) based on the statutes and case law. Why? Because this e-response is for information but is not construed "legal advice" for any particular case or client, just an explanation in response to what you posted. So this response creates NEITHER an Attorney-Client relationship NOR an Attorney-Client privilege ~ because everything is public, for all to see. For specific advice about your particular concerns or situation, consult an Attorney as a Fiduciary to you, with that 1-way Duty to you. This e-response is neither an advertisement nor a solicitation.
Generally, inherited property is separate property, and not community property, in California and belongs to the spouse who inherited the property. But if community property is used on the property, then a partial community property interest could attach. The situation which you describe is very much fact driven and requires careful analysis by an attorney experienced in California community property law. Typically, these are divorce lawyers. I suggest that you consult with one.
Yes. California divides property between community property and separate property. (There is another category of quasi-community property, but I won’t address that here.). Basically, half of the community property is owned by one spouse and half by the other. However, separate property is only owned by one spouse — thus, the word “separate” meaning not part of the community-owned property. Inherited property is separate property (unless company-mingled, such as inherited money put into a bank account full of community money.) With real estate, you don’t have a co-mingling argument very often, if ever. Instead, you have an argument that you are entitled to half of the increase in property value for the period of the marriage. But the actual property itself remains the separate property of the spouse who inherited it.
The responses I provide on Avvo are for informational and educational purposes ONLY, and do not establish an attorney-client relationship between my law office and you [either the person posting the question or anyone reading the question and response.] Unless and until you sign a written retainer agreement with my firm, I am not your lawyer and my response does not constitute "legal advice." Instead, it is an analysis based on limited facts. If you want specific legal advice upon which you can rely, then I strongly recommend you retain an attorney in your state. I am only licensed in California. See also AVVO.com terms and conditions item 9, incorporated as if it was reprinted here.
The house cannot be in the trust and also have it be true that"Mother in law as the title holder of property." That said, f the house was not paid for by community funds, then it remains SP.
This is why prenuptial agreements are a truly good thing
This is general advice. You are anonymous. If you PM me i won’t know what it’s about.
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline