Underwater Separate Property at Trial

If a couple has been in a relationship for over 20 years let's say, and substantial assets have been acquired but one party really doesn't know what the other party has done with all of the assets...or, both parties brought assets into the relationship to being with, then due to inheritance, improvements, and new business startups, or new investments acquired and sold or traded, the waters become quite muddied, and resorting out all of the transactions over many years can be very daunting.

Attorney herein used to be in an office in San Diego with a Special Master who was always working on forensic issues. Commonly, a CPA would be used but is not required unless complex tax transactions were seen for many issues. When coupled with non disclosure, these financial issues can generate some very high expenses. Many of the cases in the appeals courts can focus on the tracing of assets and division.

Example of Improper Division with Separate Property [not from Placer County]


Even though not an extremely high stakes case, (not in millions, but at least $100,000)---- attorney has seen one case locally where at the family law trial, which attorney was not involved with (both parties were pro se) ---- the "judge" [a Commissioner, not an actual judge] actually claimed to understand FL Code 2640, [see link below] but failed to generate the order after the trial which would explain how judge implemented his decision.  

    In the decision after trial, judge actually ignored the code, failed to award the one party (who had the 2640 claim) her $100,000 proven cash down payment --and simply gave the other party the wife's separate real property [which was then under water]. and there went the client's $100,000 cash down payment, AND the residence,  because Judge never allowed her the credit to begin with, or if he did, he avoided giving the wife the asset which was her own separate property to begin with? 
(Yes, attorney knows that usually the person with the underwater property should have been given the property with time to make some attempts on refi, etc.....she could have rented out 3 rooms and easily..)


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=02001-03000&file=2640-2641

Although CA case law appears to find that real property with a traceable FL2640 claim will usually go to the one who put down the separately property cash, especially if equity is lower than when acquired, and the community has not really made any headway in lowering the principle, this judge ignored the down payment cash by the one party and seemingly claimed that because there was no equity at trial, then he could just award it to the other party, because he has discretion???

Obviously IF this was true, then any judge could ignore FL2640 (as this judge seems to have done)  and just give away thousands of dollars of cash down payments, even though admittedly fully proven and traceable, and then award both the residence and any equity (even if little or none) to the other party, while ignoring the mandate that the traceable, proven cash that wife put down, SHALL be taken off the top FIRST,  because Judge wanted to exercise discretion (so he claims........)  Rather clearly, we don't think this was even discretionary, since when counsel on later motion queried "What about client's $100,000 proven cash down payment in separate property", Judge replied "That's a good question." Obviously the case was an appeals case that would have generated a better decision. The client had no funds and did not wish to do an appeal, unfortunately.
As can be seen, one needs to have a court reporter at a trial, especially if one has a lot of cash at stake. And hiring an attorney for the trial is a good idea especially when you stand to lose your $100,000 because Judge can't apply the code correctly?