In Re Marriage of Baragry
1977 Cal. App. LEXIS 1860, 140 Cal. Rptr. 779, 73 Cal. App. 3d 444 (1977)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The legal date of separation, which terminates the accumulation of community property, is determined by a complete and final break in the marital relationship, evidenced by objective conduct, not merely by physical separation or one spouse's subjective intent to end the marriage.
Facts:
- The parties were married in September 1956.
- On August 4, 1971, following a quarrel, Husband moved out of the family home and eventually moved in with his girlfriend.
- The parties had no sexual relations after Husband moved out.
- From 1971 to 1975, Husband maintained continuous and frequent contact with his family, including eating dinner at the family home several times a week, paying all household bills, and using the home as his mailing and voting address.
- During this four-year period, the parties took family vacations together, attended numerous social events as a couple, and Husband sent Wife cards and gifts expressing affection.
- Wife continued to perform domestic services for Husband, such as washing and ironing his laundry.
- Husband and Wife continued to file joint income tax returns.
Procedural Posture:
- Husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in the trial court.
- The trial court entered an interlocutory judgment of dissolution, which fixed the date of separation as August 4, 1971.
- Wife (appellant) appealed the portion of the judgment setting the date of separation to the California Court of Appeal.
- Husband is the respondent in the appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a legal separation occur on the date one spouse moves out of the family home and begins an extramarital relationship if the spouses continue to maintain significant social, domestic, and economic ties, thereby preserving the public appearance of a continuing marriage?
Opinions:
Majority - Fleming, J.
No. A legal separation requires more than just living in separate residences; it necessitates conduct demonstrating a complete and final break in the marital relationship. The court reasoned that property acquired during a marriage is strongly presumed to be community property, a principle rooted in the idea of the marital community as a partnership. As long as the wife contributes her services to the marital community, she is entitled to share in its prosperity. Here, despite the physical separation and lack of sexual relations, the parties' conduct preserved the appearance of a marriage. The husband continued to reap the social and domestic benefits of the marriage due to the wife's efforts. Therefore, to prevent the husband from enjoying the benefits of the marriage while disclaiming its financial burdens, the earnings during this period remain community property until there is a clear, objective break in the relationship.
Analysis:
This decision establishes that the determination of the date of legal separation is a fact-intensive inquiry that looks beyond a single factor like physical separation. It emphasizes the importance of objective conduct and the public appearance of the marital relationship. The ruling makes it more difficult for a spouse to unilaterally and privately end the community property partnership while still benefiting from the social and domestic aspects of the marriage. This precedent requires courts to perform a holistic analysis of the parties' relationship to determine if a 'complete and final break' has actually occurred.
