Chastain

Chastain v. Chastain CA1/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2025A168174California3,346 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chou, J.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Dissolution and MSA Chastain and Howard married in October 1992 and separated in October 2008. They entered into the MSA in December 2008, and a judgment of dissolution was filed in February 2009. Following their separation, Howard moved back to Nebraska, where she grew up. The parties met with a mediator several times to reach the terms of the MSA. Under the MSA, Chastain received the businesses Chastain Law Group and Chastain Research Group (CRG) as well as the parties’ former marital home in Palo Alto (marital home). Howard waived the receipt of spousal support. In exchange, Chastain agreed to pay Howard $341,154.50 as an equalizing payment.2 The MSA provided that this amount was to be paid in a series of installments, with the last payment due by July 2011. Chastain did not fully pay by this date but made various payments totaling $157,736.03. In October 2011, Howard recorded a lien on the marital home in an attempt to obtain the remaining equalizing payments owed by Chastain. In January 2012, Howard filed a release of abstract of judgment (lien) so that Chastain could sell the home, which he did for $525,000. Chastain received a profit of $100,000 from the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.