Marriage of Stupansky CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 2, 2013C068246California2,891 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

We limit our background recitation to the circumstances relevant to the contentions on appeal. Moreover, because the parties elected to proceed without a reporter’s transcript, the relevant facts are taken from the trial court’s findings and conclusions. (Krueger v. Bank of America (1983) 145 Cal.App.3d 204, 207.) Prior to their marriage, Victor owned a residence in Petaluma and Sandra owned a duplex in Santa Rosa. They married on September 8, 1991, resided in the Petaluma residence and rented out both units of the Santa Rosa duplex. Victor and Sandra drafted the Stupansky Family Trust in 1993 and transferred the Petaluma property into the trust. They withdrew the Petaluma property from the trust in 1994 and transferred it to themselves in joint tenancy. The parties then sold the property in 2002 for a profit of $610,000 and used the proceeds to purchase six unimproved lots in Siskiyou County. They combined two of the lots, built a family residence on them, and left the other four lots unimproved. Victor and Sandra separated on October 2, 2008. At trial, the parties disputed whether the Petaluma residence should be characterized as community or separate property,…

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.