CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Community Property Issues
......Transmutation
.........Transmutation Not Found
 15 Cards On This Topic:
  • No oral transmutations into joint tenancy.
  • No oral transmutations after 12/31/84.
  • FC 852 not subject to traditional statute of fraud exceptions; partial performance of agreement is not adequate substitute for required express declaration of transmutation.
  • No transmutation occurs when H uses his s/p to improve W's s/p residence.
  • Because H's Rolls Royce not validly transmuted under Fam. Code §852 (a), it remained his separate property and trial court erred in excluding it from probate estate.
  • Fam. Code §852 precludes admission of extrinsic evidence to prove oral transmutation of property between spouses.
  • Mere reference to joint tenancy on money market statement does not satisfy requirement of an express written declaration to transmute c/p funds.
  • Use of asset, without more, insufficient to establish gift. Donative intent required.
  • Listing property as c/p on petition not bar to later claiming it s/p, where other side did not object and defended. (Pre-1/1/85.)
  • W's working in business and preserving its value during marriage did not support finding of oral transmutation. (Pre-1/1/85.)
  • Spouse may not unilaterally transmute c/p into his/her s/p to offset gift made to other spouse. (Pre-1/1/85.)
  • Simply referring to property as "ours," without more, is insufficient to constitute oral transmutation.
  • Acquisition of property as j/t did not constitute a transmutation of c/p to s/p. Thus, requirements of FC 852 need not be complied with.
  • W could not prevent forfeiture of H's lottery winnings where forfeiture order operated on the winnings while they belonged to H, thus vesting them in U.S. and disabling H's attempted transmutation to W.
  • Ineffective transmutations.


    •