Marriage of King v. King
2009 OK 49, 212 P.3d 1232, 2009 OK CIV APP 49 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An interspousal conveyance of jointly acquired property removes that property from the marital estate and renders it the separate property of the receiving spouse if the conveying spouse had the requisite donative intent at the time of the transfer. The determination of donative intent involves examining all circumstances, including the reason for the conveyance, the relationship of the parties, and their subsequent use of the property.
Facts:
- Ted Leon King (Husband) and Margaret Raye King (Wife) were married in 1966 and acquired over 300 acres of real property and two oil and gas leases during their marriage.
- In October 2000, Husband discovered he had fathered a child out of wedlock and owed a $300,000 child support judgment from a Kansas paternity action.
- In January 2001, after consulting with an attorney, Husband conveyed the real property to Wife; in June 2001, he conveyed the oil and gas leases to her.
- Husband later provided a sworn affidavit stating he made the conveyances because Wife was deserving, as compensation for their marriage, and as an apology for his actions.
- Husband and Wife continued to live together for several years after the conveyances, and Wife shared some of the revenue from the oil and gas properties with Husband.
- The parties' relationship eventually deteriorated, leading Husband to file for divorce in 2006.
Procedural Posture:
- Ted Leon King (Husband) filed an action for divorce against Margaret Raye King (Wife) in an Oklahoma trial court.
- Husband filed a motion asking the trial court to determine that real property and oil leases he had previously conveyed to Wife were still part of the marital estate.
- After a hearing based on stipulated evidence from a prior, separate creditor action, the trial court found that the properties were Wife's separate property because Husband had intended them as a gift.
- Husband filed a motion to vacate the trial court's decision, arguing his prior affidavit was a forgery and he never intended a gift, which the trial court denied.
- The trial court entered a final decree of divorce that did not include the disputed properties in the marital estate for division.
- Husband, as Petitioner-Appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals.
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 an interspousal conveyance of jointly acquired property remove it from the marital estate when the conveying spouse demonstrates donative intent, even if the conveyance was also motivated by a desire to shield assets from a creditor?
Opinions:
Majority - Gabbard, J.
Yes. An interspousal conveyance of jointly acquired property removes it from the marital estate if the conveying spouse had donative intent at the time of the transfer. The trial court's finding that Husband intended to gift the properties to Wife is supported by substantial evidence, including Husband's own prior testimony and affidavits where he stated the transfer was an apology and an effort to preserve his marriage. While Husband also may have been motivated to shield assets from a creditor, this does not negate his expressed donative intent. The trial court weighed the conflicting evidence and its conclusion that a valid gift was made is not against the clear weight of the evidence.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the principle that a spouse's subjective intent at the time of an interspousal transfer is the key determinant of whether property is converted from marital to separate. It clarifies that a motive to shield assets from creditors does not automatically negate donative intent, especially when other evidence, such as admissions of apology or efforts to save a marriage, supports the finding of a gift. The decision underscores the high degree of deference appellate courts give to trial court findings of fact, especially when based on conflicting evidence regarding intent. Future cases involving such transfers will look to the totality of the circumstances, placing significant weight on the conveying spouse's contemporaneous statements and actions.
