Community Property

California-Specific Subject

Community Property is exclusively tested under California law on the CA Bar Exam. There is no federal or "majority rule" counterpart. Every rule in this outline derives from the California Family Code, California Probate Code, or California case law. This subject appears regularly on essay exams and frequently crosses over with Wills & Succession, Professional Responsibility (fiduciary duty between spouses), and Remedies.

I. Overview

California is one of nine community property states. The foundational principle is that marriage is an economic partnership: property acquired during marriage through the labor, skill, or effort of either spouse belongs equally to both. Community property law governs the characterization, management, and division of marital property—both during the marriage and upon its termination by divorce or death.

A. The General Community Property Presumption

Cal. Fam. Code § 760

Except as otherwise provided by statute, all property, real or personal, wherever situated, acquired by a married person during the marriage while domiciled in California is community property. This is a rebuttable presumption; the party claiming SP status bears the burden of proof.

Timing: Property is characterized at the time of acquisition.
Source of funds: If acquired with CP funds, it is CP; if acquired with SP funds, it is SP (tracing).
Burden of proof: The spouse claiming property is SP must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence.
Characterization is fixed: Once characterized, property generally retains that character unless transmuted.

B. Separate Property Defined

Cal. Fam. Code § 770

Separate property of a married person includes: (1) all property owned before marriage; (2) all property acquired during marriage by gift, bequest, devise, or descent; and (3) the rents, issues, and profits of separate property.

Key Distinction: California vs. Other CP States

In California, rents, issues, and profits of SP remain SP. This differs from some other community property jurisdictions (e.g., Texas, Idaho, Louisiana) where income from SP may be CP. This is a frequently tested distinction.

Pre-marriage property: Anything owned before the date of marriage.
Gifts and inheritance: Property received by gift, bequest, devise, or descent—even during marriage—is SP of the recipient spouse.
After separation: Earnings and accumulations after the date of separation are SP. (Cal. Fam. Code § 771.)
Rents, issues, and profits of SP: Income generated by SP assets (e.g., rent from a pre-marriage rental property) remains SP.

C. Date of Separation

Cal. Fam. Code § 70 (Post-2017 Amendment)

"Date of separation" means the date that a complete and final break in the marital relationship has occurred, as evidenced by both: (1) the spouse's expressed intent to end the marriage, and (2) conduct consistent with that intent. This codified and clarified the In re Marriage of Davis (2015) standard, superseding the earlier physical separation requirement of In re Marriage of Norviel.

II. Core Rules: Characterization

A. Time-of-Acquisition Rule

The character of property is determined at the moment of acquisition. The form of title does not conclusively determine characterization (though it creates presumptions in certain contexts). Key principles:

Property purchased during marriage with earnings is CP, regardless of which spouse earned the money or whose name is on the title.
Property acquired before marriage is SP, even if used during the marriage or improved with CP funds (though CP may gain a reimbursement right).
Property acquired by installment purchase beginning before marriage: characterized based on the inception of title or pro rata approach, depending on the asset type.

B. Source-of-Funds (Tracing)

When CP and SP funds are commingled, the character of an asset purchased from a commingled account must be traced to its source. California recognizes two primary tracing methods:

1. Direct Tracing

The proponent shows that the specific funds used to acquire the asset were SP. The spouse must demonstrate an intent to use SP funds for the purchase, even though CP funds were also available in the account.

Direct Tracing Requirements

The SP proponent must show: (1) adequate SP funds existed in the commingled account at the time of purchase, and (2) the spouse intended to use SP funds. This method is unavailable if the SP proponent cannot identify the SP funds at the time of acquisition.

2. Exhaustion Method (Family Expense Presumption)

In re Marriage of Mix (1975)

Under the exhaustion (or "recapitulation") method, the community is presumed to spend community funds first on family expenses. Whatever remains in a commingled account after family expenses are deducted is SP. If CP funds have been exhausted, any remaining balance is SP.

Tracing Failure

If neither tracing method can adequately identify the character of funds, the general CP presumption controls and the property is characterized as CP. The burden is always on the SP proponent.

C. Commingling

Commingling alone does not transmute SP into CP. But if SP and CP are so mixed that the SP component can no longer be traced, the SP is deemed "lost" and the entire fund is treated as CP.

Bank accounts: Depositing SP into a joint account does not automatically convert it to CP, but the depositing spouse bears the burden of tracing.
Improvements: Using CP funds to improve SP real estate gives the community a right of reimbursement or a pro rata interest (see In re Marriage of Moore/Marsden, below).
Business income: If a spouse operates an SP business using community labor, the community has a right to compensation (see Pereira/Van Camp, below).

D. Quasi-Community Property

Cal. Fam. Code § 125

Quasi-community property (QCP) is property acquired by either spouse while domiciled outside California that would have been CP if the acquiring spouse had been domiciled in California at the time of acquisition. QCP is relevant only upon divorce or death of the acquiring spouse.

Event	Treatment of QCP
Divorce	QCP is divided equally, just like CP. (Fam. Code § 2550.)
Death of acquiring spouse	Surviving spouse gets 1/2 of QCP; decedent can dispose of only their 1/2. (Prob. Code § 101.)
Death of non-acquiring spouse	QCP is not recognized; it remains the acquiring spouse's separate property. The non-acquiring spouse's estate has no claim.
During marriage	QCP has no effect during the ongoing marriage; it is treated as the acquiring spouse's property under the law of the state where acquired.

Migration Hypo

A classic exam pattern: Couple lives in a common-law state (e.g., New York), where Husband earns a salary and buys stock in his name alone. They then move to California. The stock is QCP—it would have been CP had they lived in California when acquired. At divorce, the court divides it equally. At Husband's death, Wife gets her 1/2. But if Wife dies first, Husband keeps it all.

E. Transmutation

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 850–853

A transmutation is a change in the character of property from SP to CP, CP to SP, or one spouse's SP to the other spouse's SP. California's transmutation rules changed dramatically in 1985.

Period	Requirement
Before January 1, 1985	Transmutation could be oral, implied by conduct, or through an agreement. Mutual understanding or oral consent was sufficient.
On or after January 1, 1985	A transmutation is not valid unless made in writing by an express declaration that is made, joined in, consented to, or accepted by the spouse whose interest is adversely affected. (Fam. Code § 852(a).)

The "Express Declaration" Requirement

Under In re Marriage of Benson (2005), the writing must contain an express declaration that the character of the property is being changed. A mere change in title (e.g., adding a spouse's name to a deed) does not satisfy the requirement. The document need not use the word "transmutation," but it must clearly indicate a change in ownership character.

Gift Exception

The writing requirement does not apply to a gift of tangible personal property of a personal nature (e.g., jewelry, clothing, personal items) that is not substantial in value taking into account the circumstances of the marriage. (Fam. Code § 852(c).)

Exam Trap: Gifts of Substantial Value

A gift of an expensive item (e.g., a $50,000 watch) likely does not fall within the gift exception if it is "substantial in value" given the parties' circumstances. Also, the exception applies only to tangible personal property—not real estate, not bank accounts, not stocks.

F. Joint Title Presumptions

1. General CP Presumption (Fam. Code § 2581)

At Divorce: § 2581 Presumption

For division at divorce, property acquired during marriage in joint form (joint tenancy, tenancy in common, "community property," or as "community property with right of survivorship") is presumed CP for purposes of division, regardless of the source of funds. This presumption can only be rebutted by a clear statement in a deed or other written document that the property is SP, or by proof that the parties had a written agreement that the property was SP.

2. The Lucas Rule and Anti-Lucas Legislation

In re Marriage of Lucas (1980) and Legislative Response

Lucas: When one spouse used SP funds to acquire property taken in joint title, the SP-contributing spouse was entitled only to a 1/2 interest (not reimbursement of SP contribution) because the joint title was treated as a "gift" of the SP to the community.

Anti-Lucas legislation (Fam. Code § 2640): The legislature reversed Lucas. Now, a party who contributes SP to the acquisition of jointly-titled property is entitled to reimbursement of their SP contribution (without interest or appreciation) before the remaining value is divided equally as CP. The contributing spouse must trace their SP contribution.

3. At Death: Probate Code § 5305

Joint Title at Death

For property held in joint tenancy between spouses, there is a presumption that the property is CP for purposes of the surviving spouse's rights at death—but only if the party can show the property was acquired with CP funds. Under Prob. Code § 5305, the surviving spouse may trace to show that the joint tenancy property was acquired with CP, entitling the survivor to the full property (their 1/2 as CP + the decedent's 1/2 that passes by survivorship).

G. Special Presumption for Married Woman's Acquisitions (Pre-1975)

Historical Rule

Before 1975, there was a presumption that property taken in a married woman's name alone was her separate property. This was based on the former Civil Code § 5110. After 1975, this presumption was abolished. However, it still applies to property acquired before 1975 and may appear on essays involving older property acquisitions.

III. Special Asset Types

A. Business and Professional Goodwill

In re Marriage of Foster (1974) / In re Marriage of McTiernan (2005)

The goodwill of a business or professional practice is a community asset to the extent it was built up during the marriage. Even a sole practitioner's professional goodwill is divisible. Courts use either a capitalization-of-excess-earnings method or a market/buy-sell method to value goodwill.

CP Interest in SP Business: Pereira vs. Van Camp

When a spouse's SP business increases in value during the marriage, the court must allocate returns between SP (capital appreciation) and CP (community labor).

Method	Approach	When Used
Pereira	SP gets a fair rate of return on the initial SP investment; all remaining profits are CP (attributable to community labor).	When the spouse's labor and effort were the primary cause of the business's growth.
Van Camp	CP gets a reasonable salary for the spouse's services; all remaining profits are SP (attributable to the character of the asset).	When the nature of the SP asset itself (e.g., unique property, market forces) was the primary cause of the growth.

Choosing Pereira vs. Van Camp

Pereira favors the community (larger CP share) and is used when the spouse's efforts drove the growth. Van Camp favors the SP owner (larger SP share) and is used when the asset's intrinsic nature drove the growth. The court has discretion to choose whichever method achieves a more equitable result, and can even use a hybrid approach.

B. Personal Injury Awards

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 780, 781, 2603

Personal injury damages received by a spouse are characterized based on when the cause of action arose:

Timing of Injury	Character	Division Rule
During marriage, before separation	Community property	At divorce: entirely to the injured spouse, unless justice requires otherwise. (Fam. Code § 2603.)
After date of separation	Separate property of injured spouse	No division; it belongs entirely to the injured spouse.
Against the other spouse	SP of injured spouse	Damages from interspousal torts are the injured spouse's SP. (Fam. Code § 781.)

C. Retirement Benefits

In re Marriage of Brown (1976) — The Time Rule

Retirement benefits are characterized as CP to the extent they were earned during the marriage. The time rule allocates the CP interest:

CP share = (years of service during marriage / total years of service) × total benefit

Each spouse receives 1/2 of the CP share.

Division Methods

In-kind division (preferred): Each spouse receives their share of the benefits as they are paid out. Implemented through a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) for private plans or a similar court order for public plans.
Present-value offset: The court calculates the present value of the CP share and offsets it against other CP assets. One spouse receives the pension; the other receives assets of equivalent value.

Hug Formula (Unvested Benefits)

For benefits that are not yet vested, the court uses the In re Marriage of Hug (1984) "time rule" with a contingency factor: if the benefits never vest, the nonemployee spouse receives nothing. The nonemployee spouse's share is determined if and when the benefits vest and are received.

D. Stock Options

In re Marriage of Hug / In re Marriage of Nelson (1986)

Stock options are characterized using a time rule that considers why the options were granted:

Options granted for past services: CP share = (years of service during marriage before grant / total years of service before grant) × options.
Options granted to incentivize future services: CP share = (years of service during marriage after grant through vesting / total years from grant through vesting) × options.
Hybrid grants: Courts may apportion between past and future service components.

E. Education and Training

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 2641

A professional degree or license is not a divisible asset. However, the community is entitled to reimbursement for CP funds used for education or training that substantially enhances the earning capacity of a spouse. Reimbursement includes costs of tuition, fees, books, and living expenses paid from CP.

Exceptions (no reimbursement required):

The community has already substantially benefited from the education (e.g., the degree was earned early in the marriage and the community enjoyed the higher income for 10+ years).
The other spouse also received CP-funded education of substantially equal value.
The need for SP support is reduced because of the education.

Rebuttable Presumption

If the education was completed less than 10 years before filing for dissolution, there is a rebuttable presumption that the community has not substantially benefited. If completed more than 10 years before filing, the presumption is that the community has substantially benefited.

F. Life Insurance

Type	Characterization Rule
Term life insurance	No cash value; the character depends on which funds paid the last premium (the premium that was in effect at death). If CP paid, the proceeds are CP; if SP paid, the proceeds are SP.
Whole life insurance	Has cash value (an asset). The cash value is apportioned based on the proportion of premiums paid with CP vs. SP funds over the life of the policy. Pro rata allocation applies.

G. Disability and Severance Pay

Cal. Fam. Code § 2603.5

Disability pay and severance pay are characterized based on what they replace:

If disability/severance replaces lost future earnings (post-separation), it is SP.
If disability/severance replaces retirement benefits, it is apportioned like retirement benefits (using the time rule).
If disability/severance replaces lost earnings during marriage, it is CP.

H. Moore/Marsden Apportionment (SP Property with CP Contributions)

In re Marriage of Moore (1980) / In re Marriage of Marsden (1982)

When one spouse owns SP real property and CP funds are used to pay the mortgage during marriage, the community acquires a pro rata interest in the property. The formula:

CP interest = (CP payments toward principal / purchase price) × FMV at time of division

This gives the community a share of the appreciation, not merely reimbursement of payments. The SP owner retains the balance.

Key Nuance

Only payments toward principal count for Moore/Marsden. Interest payments, taxes, and insurance paid from CP do not increase the community's pro rata share (though they may give rise to a right of reimbursement under Fam. Code § 2640).

IV. Management and Control

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 1100–1102

California grants equal management and control of CP to both spouses, subject to specific exceptions.

Property Type	Management Rule
CP personal property (general)	Either spouse acting alone may manage and control. (§ 1100(a).)
CP personal property — gifts/sales without consideration	Both spouses must join to make a gift of CP personal property, or to dispose of it without valuable consideration. (§ 1100(b).)
CP real property	Both spouses must join in any sale, conveyance, or encumbrance. (§ 1102.)
Business operated by one spouse	The operating spouse has primary management and control and may act alone in the ordinary course of business. (§ 1100(d).)
Separate property	Each spouse has sole management and control of their own SP. (§ 770.)

Fiduciary Duties Between Spouses

Each spouse owes the other the highest good faith and fair dealing with respect to CP—the same duties as those of a trustee to a beneficiary. (Fam. Code § 1100(e).) This duty includes full disclosure of all material facts and access to information regarding CP. A breach can result in sanctions, including an unequal division of CP at divorce.

Void Transfers

A transfer of CP real property by one spouse acting alone (without the other's written consent) is voidable by the nonconsenting spouse. The nonconsenting spouse has one year after learning of the transfer to void it (or one year after recording, whichever is later).

V. Liability of Marital Property

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 910–916

The liability rules determine which property (CP or SP) is available to satisfy which debts.

Debt Type	Property Liable
Debts incurred during marriage	All CP is liable, plus the debtor spouse's SP. The non-debtor spouse's SP is generally not liable (except for necessaries). (§ 910.)
Pre-marriage debts	The debtor spouse's SP is liable. CP is also liable, but only the debtor spouse's earnings (not the other spouse's earnings) while not commingled in a joint account. (§ 911.) After commingling, quasi-CP-like tracing applies.
Necessaries of life	Both spouses are mutually obligated. All CP and both spouses' SP may be reached. (§ 914.)
Post-separation debts	Generally the debtor spouse's SP and their share of CP. The other spouse's earnings after separation are not liable. (§ 916.)
Tort liability during marriage	If the tort was committed in the course of an activity for the benefit of the community, CP is liable first, then the tortfeasor's SP. If not for community benefit, the tortfeasor's SP is liable first, then CP. (§ 1000.)

VI. Division at Divorce

A. Equal Division Requirement

Cal. Fam. Code § 2550

At divorce, the court shall divide the community estate equally between the parties. This is a mandatory equal division, unlike equitable distribution states that allow unequal division based on fairness factors.

B. Exceptions to Equal Division

Misappropriation / breach of fiduciary duty (Fam. Code § 1101(g)): If a spouse has deliberately misappropriated CP, the court may award the entire asset (or its value plus attorney fees) to the other spouse.
Personal injury awards (Fam. Code § 2603): CP personal injury awards are assigned entirely to the injured spouse, unless justice requires otherwise.
Educational debt: Assigned to the spouse who received the education. (§ 2641.)
Negative community estate: If debts exceed assets, the court assigns debts according to relative ability to pay.
Unpaid family support / child support: The court may make an unequal division to account for unpaid support obligations.
Deliberate destruction of CP: If a spouse deliberately destroyed, dissipated, or concealed CP, the court may compensate the other spouse with a larger share of the remaining CP.

C. Reimbursement Rights (§ 2640)

Cal. Fam. Code § 2640

A party is entitled to reimbursement for SP contributions to the acquisition of CP (not improvements or payments of CP debts). Reimbursement is limited to the amount of SP contribution without interest or appreciation. The right can be waived by a written agreement.

VII. Division at Death

Prob. Code §§ 100–101

At death, each spouse owns an undivided one-half interest in the CP. The decedent may dispose of only their half of CP by will or trust. The surviving spouse automatically retains their half.

If the decedent dies intestate, the surviving spouse receives the decedent's 1/2 of CP as well (so the survivor takes all CP). (Prob. Code § 6401.)
The decedent's 1/2 of CP receives a stepped-up basis for federal income tax purposes. Under IRC § 1014(b)(6), both halves of CP receive a stepped-up basis at the first spouse's death—a significant tax advantage of CP.
QCP at death: The surviving spouse gets 1/2 of QCP; the decedent can devise only their 1/2. (Prob. Code § 101.)

VIII. Premarital Agreements

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 1610–1617 (UPAA as Modified by California)

California adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (UPAA) with significant modifications that provide greater protections than the uniform version.

A. Formal Requirements

Must be in writing and signed by both parties.
Enforceable without consideration (marriage itself is sufficient consideration).
Becomes effective upon marriage.

B. Permissible Terms

Rights in each other's property (characterization, management, disposition).
Spousal support modification or elimination (subject to special rules).
Choice of law (which state's law governs).
Cannot adversely affect the right of a child to support.

C. Enforceability

Cal. Fam. Code § 1615 (Post-2002 Amendments)

A premarital agreement is unenforceable if the party against whom enforcement is sought proves either:

The party did not execute the agreement voluntarily; OR
The agreement was unconscionable when executed AND the party was not provided a fair, reasonable, and full disclosure of the other party's property/obligations, did not voluntarily waive such disclosure, and did not have adequate knowledge of the property/obligations.

Voluntariness (Fam. Code § 1615(c))

For agreements executed after January 1, 2002, a premarital agreement is not voluntary unless:

The party against whom enforcement is sought was represented by independent legal counsel at the time of signing, OR expressly waived counsel in a separate writing.
If unrepresented, the party was fully informed of the terms and basic effect of the agreement, as well as the rights being given up.
The agreement was not executed under duress, fraud, or undue influence.
The party was given at least 7 calendar days between first being presented with the agreement and signing it.
The party was proficient in the language of the agreement, or was provided a certified translation.

Spousal Support Waivers

Special Rule for Spousal Support (Fam. Code § 1612(c))

A provision in a premarital agreement that modifies or eliminates spousal support is unenforceable if the party against whom it is enforced was not represented by independent counsel at the time of execution. Even if counsel was present, a court may refuse to enforce a spousal support waiver if enforcement would be unconscionable at the time of enforcement.

IX. Putative Spouse and Domestic Partnerships

A. Putative Spouse

Cal. Fam. Code § 2251

A putative spouse is a person who has a good faith belief that they are lawfully married when the marriage is actually void or voidable. The putative spouse acquires the same rights to property accumulated during the putative marriage as a legal spouse would have to CP—such property is called "quasi-marital property."

Good faith belief must be objectively reasonable.
Only the innocent (good-faith) spouse has putative spouse rights; the knowing party does not.
If both parties had good faith belief, both have putative spouse rights.
Rights continue until the putative spouse learns the marriage is invalid.

B. Domestic Partnerships

Cal. Fam. Code §§ 297–299.6

Registered domestic partners in California have the same rights and obligations as married spouses with respect to community property. All CP rules apply equally to domestic partnerships. This includes characterization, management and control, division at dissolution, and liability rules.

Classify property acquired out-of-state: Would it have been CP if acquired while domiciled in CA? If yes, it is QCP.
At divorce: QCP is divided equally, just like CP.
At death of acquiring spouse: Surviving spouse gets 1/2 of QCP; decedent can dispose of only their 1/2.
At death of non-acquiring spouse: QCP is NOT recognized. The property remains the acquiring spouse's.
During marriage: QCP has no effect; the property retains its character under the state of acquisition.

XI. Issue Spotting Checklist

Characterization: For every asset, ask: When acquired? Source of funds? Gift/inheritance? Before or after separation?
Date of marriage and date of separation: These bookend the CP period. Identify both precisely.
Transmutation: Any change in property character? Post-1985: Is there a written express declaration?
Commingling: Were SP and CP funds mixed? Can the proponent trace?
Joint title: How is the property titled? Apply § 2581 at divorce, Prob. Code § 5305 at death.
Special assets: Retirement (time rule), stock options, business goodwill (Pereira/Van Camp), PI awards, education, life insurance, disability/severance.
Moore/Marsden: CP payments on SP real property mortgage? Community gets pro rata share of appreciation.
§ 2640 reimbursement: SP contribution to acquisition of CP property?
QCP: Property acquired out-of-state? Who dies or files for divorce?
Premarital agreement: Is there one? Is it enforceable? Voluntariness, counsel, 7-day rule, disclosure, unconscionability.
Management and control: Did one spouse act unilaterally? Real property requires joinder. Gifts of CP personal property require joinder.
Fiduciary duty: Did a spouse breach the duty of good faith and fair dealing? Concealment, misappropriation, failure to disclose?
Liability: Whose debt is it? When incurred? Is it for necessaries? Was it a tort for community benefit?
Division: Equal division at divorce. Identify exceptions: misappropriation, PI awards, educational debt, deliberate destruction.
Death: Decedent can only dispose of their 1/2 of CP. Surviving spouse automatically retains their 1/2.
Putative spouse: Was there a good faith belief in a valid marriage? Quasi-marital property rights.
Domestic partnership: Same rules as marriage for CP purposes.

XII. Exam Tips

1. Go Asset by Asset

The single most important structural decision in a CP essay is to organize your answer asset by asset. For each asset: (1) identify it, (2) characterize it (CP/SP/mixed/QCP), (3) explain why, (4) state how it is divided. Do not try to discuss all the law first and then apply it—weave analysis into each asset discussion.

2. Always State the General CP Presumption

Begin every characterization analysis by stating: "All property acquired during marriage while domiciled in California is presumed CP. The party claiming SP has the burden of proof." This frames every issue.

3. Watch the Dates

Three critical dates: (1) date of marriage, (2) date of separation, and (3) date of any transmutation. Also note if any acquisitions occurred pre-1975 (married woman's presumption) or pre-1985 (oral transmutation allowed).

4. Know Which Division Context You Are In

The rules differ significantly depending on whether you are dividing at divorce vs. at death. For example: PI awards go entirely to the injured spouse at divorce (§ 2603) but are simply CP (each spouse owns 1/2) at death. QCP is recognized at divorce and at the acquiring spouse's death, but NOT at the non-acquiring spouse's death. Always identify the context first.

5. Do Not Overlook Reimbursement

Even if an asset is classified entirely as CP or SP, check for reimbursement rights: § 2640 (SP contributions to CP acquisition), § 2641 (education), Moore/Marsden (CP contributions to SP mortgage), Watts charges (exclusive post-separation use of CP), and Epstein credits (SP used to pay CP debts post-separation).

6. Fiduciary Duty is a Favorite Crossover

If any fact suggests one spouse is hiding assets, transferring CP without consent, or managing CP recklessly, discuss the fiduciary duty between spouses (Fam. Code § 1100(e)). The remedy can include an unequal division, attorney fees, or awarding 100% of a misappropriated asset to the injured spouse.

XIII. Mnemonics

SP Sources: "BIG DRIPS"

Before marriage
Inheritance
Gift
Descent (bequest, devise)
Rents, issues, profits of SP
Interspousal tort recovery
Post-separation earnings
Specifically transmuted to SP (in writing, post-1985)

Premarital Agreement Voluntariness: "CLD-7-LP"

Counsel (independent legal counsel, or written waiver)
Language proficiency (or certified translation)
Duress/fraud/undue influence (must be absent)
7-day waiting period
Leaving nothing out (full disclosure)
Party must be fully informed of terms and rights being waived

Division Exceptions: "MENDED"

Misappropriation / breach of fiduciary duty
Educational debt (assigned to educated spouse)
Negative community (debts exceed assets)
Deliberate destruction or dissipation of CP
Entirely to injured spouse (PI awards, § 2603)
Delinquent support obligations

Disability/Severance: "What Does It Replace?"

Replaces retirement → Time rule (same as pension)
Replaces future earnings → SP (post-separation = not community effort)
Replaces lost earnings during marriage → CP

Pereira vs. Van Camp: "PEL-VAN"

Pereira = Effort/Labor drove growth → Give SP fair return; rest is CP
Van Camp = Asset's Nature drove growth → Give CP reasonable salary; rest is SP

XIV. Key Distinctions

Issue	Rule A	Rule B
Transmutation pre-1985 vs. post-1985	Pre-1985: Oral agreement, conduct, or mutual understanding sufficed.	Post-1985: Must have a written express declaration accepted by the adversely affected spouse.
Pereira vs. Van Camp	Pereira: Spouse's effort drove business growth → SP gets fair return; rest = CP.	Van Camp: Asset's inherent nature drove growth → CP gets reasonable salary; rest = SP.
Division at divorce vs. death	Divorce: Court must divide CP equally (§ 2550). PI awards go to injured spouse (§ 2603).	Death: Decedent can dispose of their 1/2 of CP by will. Surviving spouse keeps their 1/2 automatically.
QCP at death: acquiring vs. non-acquiring spouse	Acquiring spouse dies: Survivor gets 1/2 of QCP; decedent can devise only their 1/2.	Non-acquiring spouse dies: QCP is not recognized; acquiring spouse keeps everything.
§ 2640 reimbursement vs. Moore/Marsden	§ 2640: SP contribution to acquisition of CP → dollar-for-dollar reimbursement (no appreciation).	Moore/Marsden: CP contribution to SP real property mortgage → pro rata share of appreciation.
Term vs. whole life insurance	Term: Character depends on who paid the last premium in effect at death.	Whole: Pro rata allocation based on proportion of CP vs. SP premiums over the life of the policy.
Direct tracing vs. exhaustion method	Direct tracing: SP proponent shows specific SP funds were used and intended for the purchase.	Exhaustion: Presume CP funds were spent first on family expenses; remaining balance is SP.
Pre-marriage debt vs. during-marriage debt	Pre-marriage: Debtor's SP liable; only debtor's own CP earnings (not commingled) available.	During marriage: All CP liable, plus debtor's SP. Non-debtor's SP is not liable (except necessaries).
Putative spouse vs. legal spouse	Putative spouse: Good faith belief in valid marriage → quasi-marital property rights (same as CP).	Legal spouse: Full CP rights, including QCP, retirement, management, and fiduciary duties.
Watts charges vs. Epstein credits	Watts: Spouse exclusively using CP asset post-separation may be charged for the reasonable value of that use.	Epstein: Spouse who uses SP to pay CP obligations post-separation is entitled to reimbursement.

Joint Title Context	Presumption Applied	How to Rebut
At Divorce (Fam. Code § 2581)	Jointly titled property acquired during marriage is presumed CP.	Clear statement in the deed or written agreement that the property is SP.
At Death (Prob. Code § 5305)	Joint tenancy between spouses may be shown to be CP by tracing source of funds.	Acquiring spouse's estate shows the property was acquired with SP funds and intended to remain SP.
Lucas (pre-anti-Lucas)	SP contributed to joint title = "gift" → only 1/2 interest returned.	Overridden by § 2640: SP contributor now gets full reimbursement (no appreciation).

PI Awards	During Marriage	At Divorce	After Separation
Character	CP	CP (but assigned to injured spouse per § 2603)	SP of injured spouse
Against other spouse	Always SP of the injured spouse (Fam. Code § 781)

Previous
Real Property Next
Wills & Succession