re: Question about property ownership

No.....no.....no

If the home was acquired prior to the marriage, then it is considered separate property see LA Civil Code Art. 2341

The separate property of a spouse is his exclusively. Does not matter if the note in and of itself was paid with community funds once the legal regime (matrimony). It's his and his alone.....the spouse has no claim under the law to the property, she could sue to be paid back if her funds helped to pay the note, but it's generally a loser

quote:

---

No.....no.....no

If the home was acquired prior to the marriage, then it is considered separate property see LA Civil Code Art. 2341

The separate property of a spouse is his exclusively. Does not matter if the note in and of itself was paid with community funds once the legal regime (matrimony). It's his and his alone.....the spouse has no claim under the law to the property, she could sue to be paid back if her funds helped to pay the note, but it's generally a loser

---

that code you references is acquired property...... a house with a mortgage isnt acquired property. Im not an attorney but that is how i have heard many attorneys explain it. Everything put into the house after marriage is community property.

quote:

---

Does the woman have a claim to ownership?

---

NO. the only thing she would be entitled to is HALF of the amount of the principle reduction during the term of their marriage. at least this is the way it was explained to me here in arkansas

for example: 200,000 is owed on the house at time of marriage. during the 5 years of marriage the principle is reduced to 160,000 she would be entitled to 20k which is exactly half of the principle reduction for the time they were married. this is obviously if he wants to keep the house.

not too long ago went through almost this exact scenario and this is what i was told per my lawyers.

ETA: my lawyers also sucked donkey dong so, i am only assuming this is correct

quote:

---

she is entitled to reimbursement of half of all mortgage payments made during the marriage

---

Wouldn't it be half of the either the difference in the mortgage principal balance or half the difference in amount of equity?

It is the difference in principle between date of marriage and date of file.

That is not the same. Half of the payment would include interest. Half of principle does not.

quote:

---

I'm going to assume he didn't do the correct steps to declare those funds as separate income,

---

very good point. this gets really messy if he didn't file this paperwork correctly b/c the fruits can be community

i mean the house is his, it's just what the reimbursements become ultimately

quote:

---

Everything put into the house after marriage is community property.

---

it depends on the nature of the property "put into the house"

if he buys the house before marriage and then makes an improvement with inherited (separate) and non-commingled funds, then you're going to have a real tough time arguing that improvement is somehow community

quote:

---

I have a piece of property that is family land and inherited. No structures on it. From what I've been told, since I inherited before I was married, the wife has no claim to it if we ever got a divorce.

I am not a lawyer; this is just my understanding. I could be wrong.

---

unless something weird happens, that should be your property 100% until you sell it or die

however, if you strike oil on it, you have to file certain paperwork to ensure those revenues (or fruits) are separate

no. this shite is complicated. we really need to figure out a better way to separate property from marriages

the issue is that people go into marriages full of optimistic emotion, and not logic, and due to that, they don't plan ahead

*ETA: for example, it's absolute fricking bullshite that fruits of separate property become community property somehow