Marriage Of Valli

58 Cal.4th 1396 (2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

After a 20-year marriage, H and W were separated in September 2004. In March 2003, H used community property to buy a $ 3.75 million insurance policy on his life, naming W as the sole owner and beneficiary. Until the parties separated, the policy premiums were likewise paid with community property funds from a joint bank account. W testified that she and H, while he was in the hospital for “heart problems,” had talked about buying a life insurance policy. H and their business manager, Barry Siegel, told W that they would make her the policy's owner. H testified that she would take care and give to the kids what they might have coming” and that he had no plans to separate from W when he bought the policy. The trial court ruled that the insurance policy was community property. The court awarded the policy to H and ordered him to buy out W's interest in the policy by paying her $182,500, representing one-half of the policy's cash value. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the insurance policy was W's separate property. This appeal resulted.