Divorce California - You can't give community assets away without telling your spouse.

Wife sues father-in-law and brother's in law for the transfer of business for less than fair market value. Husband owned the sole share of a business worth approximately 15 Million father-in-law and brothers-in-law convince Husband to transfer 15 percent to brother who is going bankrupt without telling wife and concealing from wife her community property interest as well as the transfer. Community property is property not owned before or after marriage that stems from the industry of the parties.

Of course the parties eventually get divorced, wife finds out about the transfer and wants half of the value of the business. Wife argues that pursuant to family code section 1100 which prohibits disposal of community property for less than fair market value, the community should recover the property.

Extended family argue that your causes of action are barred by the 3 year statute because you plead in your moving papers the transfer was 6 years ago.

Appeals Court finds that concealment moves the date of commencement of discovery of the facts regarding a case to the date the party knew or should have known about the transfer.

The Appeals Court further finds that the extended families position that they had no duty to disclose the nature of the transaction and therefore the statute of limitation's tolling does not apply to them is not valid. Using that logic a spouse could convey property and then have the recipient wait out the statute before asserting ownership. This type of transfer has been previously found to be unlawful.

The bottom line here is that the court is not going to sanction a transfer of community property below market value nor allow a third party to benefit from it without knowledge of the other spouse.

MARYAM RASHTCHI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ARMAN RASHTCHI et al.,Defendants and Respondents.G041360