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 New York on January 15, 1931. They established their domicile in San Francisco and resided there until they separated on December 28, 1940. W filed for divorce on January 19, 1942. The trial court found that the residence of the parties in San Francisco was community property and awarded W a one-half interest therein, together with the exclusive right of use and occupancy. The house was purchased in 1938. Title was taken in H's name. The house cost $20,000. H testified that he paid for the house in cash and that the funds used for the purchase were the accumulations of dividends from property owned by him before marriage. H's sole community income was $6,000 a year. W testified that she estimated their living expenses at $3,500 to $ 4,000 per month. H reasoned that the community funds were more than exhausted in paying the living expenses, and therefore, the house must have been purchased with his separate funds. H kept W in complete ignorance of his income and assets, and that she knew nothing of his business affairs. W testified that immediately after buying the house, H told her that it was community property. H testified that he got the cash out of a corporation safe located in his brokerage office. H's salary from the corporation was kept in this safe in a separate envelope and that periodically he transferred the appropriate amount of cash from the compartment of the corporation to this envelope. H testified that it cost them $300 to $800 a month for living expenses. There is substantial evidence that after marriage P, who is an artist, sold some of her art creations for substantial sums, and that the money so received was treated as community property. The court labeled the house community property. W got a 1/2 interest and an exclusive right to use the home. H appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co