Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
H and W were married in Connecticut and during their marriage acquired a home in Pennsylvania, that residence having been sold when they moved to California in 1949, at which time the Sherman Oaks residence was purchased and titled to H and W as joint tenants. H borrowed $3,000 from his father to apply on the purchase price, and that sum has not been repaid. Declaring that it was impossible to continue to live together as husband and wife, W commenced an action for divorce on October 1, 1952. W alleged that certain real property known as 14041 Roblar Road, Sherman Oaks, California, was community property. W testified that she did not understand the meaning of joint tenancy, that no one explained its nature or effect to her, that she signed the papers in connection with the transaction, that she thought the property 'belonged to both of us' and that it was community property, and that all payments made on the property came from H's earnings. W also admitted that she did not know anything about community property at that time. The court ruled that the residence was community property, based on the intentions of H and W. H appealed in that H claimed they intended to own the residence as joint tenants.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co