Bauer v. Garrett
Citations
- 79 Cal. 304
- 21 P. 759
- 1889 Cal. LEXIS 725
Syllabus
<p>Husband and Wife — Community Property—Disputable Presumption. — Property purchased during coverture is presumptively community property; but this presumption is disputable, and may be overcome by clear and certain proof that the property, or a part thereof, was purchased with separate funds.</p> <p>Id. —Mingling of Common and Separate Property. —When property is acquired partly with separate funds and partly with community funds, it becomes in part the separate property of the spouse furnishing the separate funds, and in part community property, in proportion to the separate and community funds invested in it.</p> <p>Id. — Following Separate Property •— Profits. — In following separate property through its various mutations, the principles should be applied that what is shown to be separate property remains such, and that the profits thereof acquire the same character. But where profits are earned by the commingling of common and separate funds so as to destroy their identity, it not appearing what proportion of profits belonged to each, such profits must be considered as belonging to the community.</p> <p>Id. — Investment of Separate Property — Partnership—Purchase and Sale of Partner’s Interest. — When the property invested in a partnership business is the separate property of the husband, and the husband subsequently purchases the interest of his partner in such business out of his separate funds, and resells the same at a profit to another partner, the proceeds of such sale, including the profit realized, must be deemed the separate property of the husband.</p> <p>Id, — Homestead — Evidence — Admissions of Wife as to Separate Property of Husband — Estoppel. — A declaration of homestead joined in by husband and wife, which declares that the homestead property to the extent of three thousand dollars was acquired and improved with the separate estate of the husband, is an admission of the wife, which can be used as evidence against her, though standing alone it
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “We need not address whether sovereign immunity would act as a bar to appellant’s declaratory action, as it is clear that, if the declaratory action were barred by sovereign immunity (thus leaving appellant without an adequate legal remedy
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gibson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.