Also, the community would just be reimbursed for any payments, as opposed to trying to figure out what some percentage it might have in separate property would be worth.
And this is how I know it.
Where I live there are multi-page worksheets to determine things like this, before the lawyers even start arguing. Ultimately, the law here is that the division of property is whatever a judge deems to be "equitable".
Any asset that community money touched is subject to that equitable division, regardless of how much each party may have contributed.
I had a friend who got divorced last year who had 50% of his 401K taken, and the wife had zero taken from hers. The judge gave zero fucks how much he or she put in pre-marriage. It was a community asset and thus subject to equitable division. As was hers, but the judge's definition of "equitable" there doesn't match mine.
"We'll it looks like you put $100K into your mortgage after you got married. We don't care that the house has appreciated 300% in the intervening 25 years- $100K to the ex-wife!" Only exists in your fevered imagination.
Again, no one needs to take my word for it. Google it, consult an attorney, read the MGTOW board. Or get divorce-raped; your call.
Not a lawyer, but I did get divorced and I have been to court twice on criminal charges, and if you think anything in court is simple and can't be turned into a cluster fuck you've clearly never been to court.
Yeah, you're an idiot.
And this is how I know it.
Where I live there are multi-page worksheets to determine things like this, before the lawyers even start arguing. Ultimately, the law here is that the division of property is whatever a judge deems to be "equitable".
Any asset that community money touched is subject to that equitable division, regardless of how much each party may have contributed.
I had a friend who got divorced last year who had 50% of his 401K taken, and the wife had zero taken from hers. The judge gave zero fucks how much he or she put in pre-marriage. It was a community asset and thus subject to equitable division. As was hers, but the judge's definition of "equitable" there doesn't match mine.
"We'll it looks like you put $100K into your mortgage after you got married. We don't care that the house has appreciated 300% in the intervening 25 years- $100K to the ex-wife!" Only exists in your fevered imagination.
Again, no one needs to take my word for it. Google it, consult an attorney, read the MGTOW board. Or get divorce-raped; your call.
Not a lawyer, but I did get divorced and I have been to court twice on criminal charges, and if you think anything in court is simple and can't be turned into a cluster fuck you've clearly never been to court.