Legal Question in Family Law in California

If you can establish that it was not intended that your contribution to the purchase was a gift to the marital community, then you are entitled to that money back before the remaining equity in the property is divided 50/50.

I disagree with Mr. McCormick. The property is community property. You would be entitled to claim a reimbursement for the initial purchase contribution.

�For the purpose of division of property on dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties, property acquired by the parties during marriage in joint form, including property held in tenancy in common, joint tenancy, or tenancy by the entirety, or as community property, is presumed to be community property.� (Fam. Code, � 2581.)

This is a presumption affecting the burden of proof and can only be rebutted by a clear statement in the deed that the property is separate, and not community property or by a written agreement between the spouses. (Fam. Code, � 2581 subd. (a) and (b).)

�Under section 2581, all property held in joint title by spouses during marriage is presumed to be community property upon dissolution, rebuttable only by written evidence to the contrary.� (In re Marriage of Weaver (4th Dist. 2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 858, 865.)

There is a right of reimbursement upon dissolution for a spouse who contributed separate property held in joint tenancy, absent a written waiver of the right to reimbursement. �In the division of the community estate under this division, unless a party has made a written waiver of the right to reimbursement or has signed a writing that has the effect of a waiver, the party shall be reimbursed for the party�s contributions to the acquisition of property of the community property estate to the extent the party traces the contributions to a separate property source.� (Fam. Code, � 2640 subd. (b.)