Download University of California Law Examination: California Marital Property and more Exams Property Law in PDF only on Docsity! Παγε 1 οφ 4 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA COURSE EXAMINATION SCHOOL OF LAW Fall 2003 LAW 281.2: CALIFORNIA MARITAL PROPERTY INSTRUCTOR: HERMA HILL KAY TIME ALLOWED: 2½ HOURS CLOSED BOOK EXAMINATION NUMBERS: Please be sure to put your correct Fall exam number on each page of the exam (if typed) or on each blue book. COMPLETION: DO NOT CONTINUE WRITING AFTER TIME HAS BEEN CALLED. Please do NOT leave your bluebook or typed answers on the desk. Exams MUST be turned in to the person in charge. If you finish early, you must turn your exam in to the Registrar’s Office in Room 270 Simon Hall. There are no space limits. I. 40 % CREDIT Mary and Jim and Susan and Bob grew up together in the same small California town. They were childhood sweethearts. After graduating from college they had a double wedding. They bought homes next door to each other in their same hometown neighborhood. Mary and Jim bought their $100,000 house using a $20,000 gift to Mary from her parents as the down payment and taking out an $80,000 loan. They took title as “Mary and Jim, husband and wife, as community property.” At the same time, they entered into an oral agreement, preserving Mary’s 20% separate property interest in the house. Susan and Bob bought their $100,000 house using a $20,000 gift to Susan from her parents as the down payment and taking out an $80,000 loan. They took title as “Susan and Bob, husband and wife, as Joint Tenants.” Susan executed a Παγε 2 οφ 4 written waiver of her statutory right to reimbursement. Answer the following questions and discuss fully: 1. Assume both couples purchased their houses in 1984. Assume further that both couples file for divorce in 2003. How and why should the trial court characterize the parties’ interests in the houses, which are each presently valued at $400,000? (Assume that the loan is fully paid.) 2. How and why would the trial court’s characterization of the parties’ property interests change if the houses had been purchased in 1987? 3. Assume that both couples become reconciled and that no divorce was entered. In 2003, Jim and Bob were both killed in a plane crash. Neither had made a will. What are the rights of Mary and Susan in the respective houses? 4. How and why would your answer change with respect to question #3 if both Jim and Bob had made wills leaving their one-half of the community property to their mothers? II. 20% CREDIT Assume that Mary and Jim and Susan and Bob married in 2000. Mary got pregnant right away, and she and Jim have twin girls, born in 2001. Susan and Bob have not been as successful. Susan’s gynecologist thinks she may have an infertility problem and suggests that she should find an egg donor. Susan asks Mary whether she would be willing to provide several eggs for Susan’s use. Mary agrees, but asks Susan not to tell Jim or Bob, because Mary thinks Bob would not approve. Nine months later, after the successful embryo transplantation, Susan gives birth to twin girls who look just like Mary’s twins. Jim becomes suspicious and Mary finally tells him what happened. Jim demands that Bob and Susan pay him and Mary the market price that Susan would have paid an egg donor, roughly $50,000. Bob and Susan refuse. Jim thereupon files an action for breach of fiduciary duty against Mary under Family Code §721 and §1101 (g), alleging that she has violated her duty of fair dealing and has taken unfair advantage of him in violation of §721, and asking
