Is property bought with inheritance community property?

[breeasch]

Jurisdiction

California

Hello,
If a manufactured home was purchased with inheritance funds, is it community property when it comes to divorce?
Home is on leased land, bought in 2010 by Petitioner as a sole owner. Petitioner added Respondent to title.

Does this property need to be divided?

Thank you

 

[Zigner]

Hello,
If a manufactured home was purchased with inheritance funds, is it community property when it comes to divorce?
Home is on leased land, bought in 2010 by Petitioner as a sole owner. Petitioner added Respondent to title.

Does this property need to be divided?

Thank you

Of course it does - they both own it.

 

[zddoodah]

If a manufactured home was purchased with inheritance funds, is it community property when it comes to divorce?

In the event of a divorce, all property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be community property. The presumption may be rebutted by, e.g., evidence that the property was acquired by only one spouse by gift, bequest, devise, or descent (including inheritance or by using inherited funds).

Keep in mind, however, that the acquisition of property by inheritance only determines that it was separate property at the time it was acquired. It is possible for property to be transmuted from separate to community and for the non-owner spouse to acquire a community property interest in the other's separate property.

Petitioner added Respondent to title.

Then that is going to create a presumption (one that may be difficult to rebut) that, despite the manner of acquisition, the petitioner transmuted his/her separate property into community property.

Does this property need to be divided?

You can't divide a mobile home. You can sell it and divide the proceeds or you award it to one spouse with the other receiving other assets to balance it out.

Are you the petitioner or the respondent, and what result do you want?

 

[army judge]

Hello,
If a manufactured home was purchased with inheritance funds, is it community property when it comes to divorce?
Home is on leased land, bought in 2010 by Petitioner as a sole owner. Petitioner added Respondent to title.

Does this property need to be divided?

Thank you

Had the person INHERITING funds NOT put the SPOUSE on title, the mobile home would never have become subject to community property.

However, that is precisely what was done.

Therefore, upon divorce the asset is subject to be sold and the proceeds DIVIDED EQUALLY between the two parties.

Is My Inheritance Considered Community Property | California Family Law

When is an Inheritance Community Property ?

Is Inherited Money Considered Marital Property?

California Community Property Law Explained

 

[breeasch]

In the event of a divorce, all property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be community property. The presumption may be rebutted by, e.g., evidence that the property was acquired by only one spouse by gift, bequest, devise, or descent (including inheritance or by using inherited funds).

Keep in mind, however, that the acquisition of property by inheritance only determines that it was separate property at the time it was acquired. It is possible for property to be transmuted from separate to community and for the non-owner spouse to acquire a community property interest in the other's separate property.



Then that is going to create a presumption (one that may be difficult to rebut) that, despite the manner of acquisition, the petitioner transmuted his/her separate property into community property.



You can't divide a mobile home. You can sell it and divide the proceeds or you award it to one spouse with the other receiving other assets to balance it out.

Are you the petitioner or the respondent, and what result do you want?

Thank you for your informative answer. I am posting this question on behalf of my mother who is not as internet savvy. She is the petitioner.

I suspected that intentionally adding him to the title made the home community property with no real chance to argue otherwise. I was not inferring we would physical divide the actual building, but the proceeds of it.

 

[zddoodah]

I suspected that intentionally adding him to the title made the home community property with no real chance to argue otherwise.

There's not NO chance to argue otherwise. The extent to which it will be difficult depends on what the intent was when your father (?) was added to the title. Having him on title is NOT dispositive of the issue. The best case scenario would be if there were a signed writing that said, in effect, "we are putting Bob on title because ___, but there is no intent for Martha to transmute the property from separate to community property." Of course, that's almost never going to happen. If you get into a battle of testimony, then it'll be a toss up and expensive to litigate.