However, a very different result applies when separate funds are used to improve a home during marriage. In the state of Arizona, all real estate is considered common property. However, the property is identified at the time of the acquisition and, therefore, if you own property before your marriage, it is and will remain your separate property – unless you have given the same to your spouse, that you have entered into an agreement to transfer the same thing to your spouse or mixed with the property of your spouse AND that it is not necessary to distinguish it now from the common property. By definition, common property is property acquired during marriage as a result of the work of man and woman. In this case, single and segregated funds are considered by law as a gift to the Community, without agreement between the spouses on the repayment of separate and separate funds. Similarly, in In Re Marriage of Inboden, the Arizona Court of Appeals held that a court could not order an unequal distribution of common property only to subject a spouse to reimbursement for the use of his or her proprietary and distinct property to acquire or enhance the condominium. Some people ask what happens when the separate property is used to buy a home during the wedding in Arizona. Arizona State public policy is to preserve and protect the community whenever possible. As a very general rule and as an example of many situations that could arise, the Community receives a Community pledge when Community funds are used to improve the exclusive and distinct ownership of the other spouse, but only to the extent that these improvements have increased the value of this unique and distinct heritage. The Court of Appeal argued that a court may consider the respective contributions of their separate property to the co-ownership if the judge exercises his broad discretion to consider the „great image“ in the division of that common property. Even if the property is built as your separate property, the municipality may have an interest in this property if the municipality has contributed to the improvement or conservation of this distinct property.
If there is a death or divorce, the consequences of discovering that you have signed a brine and divorce agreement can be quite devastating! In the case of our client, he was married for 25 years, but it was a second marriage for him and his wife, and his wife had adult children. Had the Sole and Separate agreement not been signed, the property would have been in his name and no estate proceedings or legal action would have been necessary. But since the brine and brine were signed, our client had to hire a lawyer and begin the estate process. He had to contact all their adult children to hand over the property. You can also read our summary of the Arizona Court of Appeals case of In Re the Marriage of Flowers, as the court ruled that a trial judge could share unequally separated property that has been converted into condominiums if it is fair.