Jacquemart v. Jacquemart

California Court of Appeal May 11, 1954 No. Civ. 19919Published

Before: Drapeau

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that property acquired by a husband after a decree of separate maintenance but before the enactment of Civil Code section 169.1 is community property, but it is error to impress a lien upon or order the sale of such property to secure support payments, as the husband retains the right to manage and control community property.

Issues

Whether property acquired by a husband after a decree of separate maintenance but before the enactment of Civil Code section 169.1 constitutes community property.
Whether a court may impress a trust and lien upon community property to secure a husband's support obligations after a decree of separate maintenance.

Disposition. modified and affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The property here in question was acquired after marriage, before the enactment of Civil Code, section 169.1 in 1951, comes within none of the exceptions specified in our law (10 Cal.Jur.2d 670), and is community property.”

“it was error to impress a trust upon specific community real property to secure the indebtedness of $396; to charge the property with a lien, to order its sale, or to trammel the husband’s power to manage and control it.”

DRAPEAU, J.

Mr. and Mrs. Eugene A. Jacquemart were married June 17,1919. In 1942 a judgment of separate maintenance was granted to Mrs. Jacquemart. Her husband was ordered to pay $125 per month for her support, and for the support of a then minor child. The court divided the community property of the parties equally between them.

After that the order for support was modified from time to time. Mr. Jacquemart complied with all of the orders, except that at the time of this action he owed his wife $396 for the period December 15, 1950, to March 1, 1951.

After 1942 Mr. Jacquemart lived with Mrs. Pearl Cox. June 13, 1950, he gave Mrs. Cox $11,300 that he had earned in the automobile business. Mrs. Cox used the money to purchase a home that she and Mr. Jacquemart thereafter occupied. The purchase price was $20,500. Title to the

[124]

property was taken in the name of Mrs. Cox, subject to a mortgage indebtedness for the balance of the purchase price.

Mrs. Jacquemart named Mr. Jacquemart and Mrs. Cox defendants in this action to impress a trust upon the property as community property.

The trial court adjudged that, subject to the mortgage lien, the property was held by defendant Pearl Cox as trustee for the husband and wife; that it was community property; that defendant husband pay the wife $350 attorney’s fees; that plaintiff have a lien on the community property interest of defendant for $396; that said property “shall secure the payment of any other moneys which have heretofore or may hereafter be ordered to be paid by the husband to the wife for her support and maintenance”; and that a writ of execution issue for the sale of the property to enforce the terms of the judgment.

Mr. Jacquemart and Mrs. Cox appeal.

Since the adoption of section 169 of the Civil Code in 1872 our law has provided that after a decree of separate maintenance the wife’s earnings and accumulations are her separate property. Until 1951 no corresponding right was given to the husband. In 1951 section 169.1 was added to the Civil Code, providing that the husband’s earnings after a decree of separate maintenance are likewise separate property.

Jacquemart v. Jacquemart

AI Brief

DRAPEAU, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief