In Re Marriage of Tallman

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 192·22 Cal. App. 4th 1697·28 Cal. Rptr. 2d 323·94 Daily Journal DAR 2885·1994 WL 63023
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 3, 1994D018475California771 words

Opinion

Opinion

marriage to Geryl Tallman. He asserts the trial court erred in determining the amount of the reimbursement to which she was entitled for spending her separate property funds to extinguish a debt encumbering the community residence Civ. Code, (former § 4800.2, now Fam. Code, § 2640). We agree with Mr. Tallman’s contention.

Facts

The parties married on May 29, 1980, and separated on February 6, 1990. On January 24, 1985, they purchased a home in Lakeside. They made a $10,125 down payment, $6,818 of which came from Mrs. Tallman’s separate funds. Part of the balance owed was secured by two trust deeds in favor of the Scotts, one for $48,500 and the other for $4,500, for a total of $53,000; the remaining balance was secured by a trust deed in favor of Security Pacific Bank. On January 24, 1985, Mrs. Tallman paid the Scotts $40,000 of her separate property funds and in exchange they forgave the $53,000 debt.

At trial on October 30, 1992, the court found the house’s gross fair market value was $143,000, and as of the date of separation, the parties owed $68,200, leaving a net fair market value of $74,800. It ruled Mrs. Tallman was entitled to a $59,818 reimbursement ($53,000…

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.