Community Property Laws in Arizona

Arizona Community Property Laws from Chris Hildebrand on Vimeo

Thank you for visiting our Scottsdale Arizona community property laws page. Our Scottsdale community property attorneys want to provide you with answers to all of your questions regarding community property and family law.

We strive to provide answers to all of your questions regarding community property and family law. We encourage you to view our Arizona Community Property | Frequently Asked Questions page, as well as our Family Law Blog, to obtain more information about all aspects of family law.


Community Property in Arizona

Arizona is a community property state. There are only nine states in the country that apply community property laws in a marriage, which include Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Alaska. Alaska is considered an “opt in” community property state because married people in that state can choose to opt in to a community property marriage or rely upon common law principles to apply to their property.

At the core of the community property principles is that each spouse has equal ownership and control over all community property acquired during the parties’ marriage as confirmed by the Arizona Supreme Court in the seminal case of La Tourette v. La Tourette.

Arizona Revised Statute Section 25-318 provides that the court shall fairly and equitably divide all community property and quasi-community property. Property acquired in a community property state is, by definition, community property.
Arizona Community Property Laws
However, property acquired by a married couple who lived in a non-community property state is not, by definition, community property but is, instead, considered by law in Arizona as quasi community property; meaning the Arizona law requires the Arizona divorce court to treat such quasi property as if it had been acquired in a community property state.

An interesting bankruptcy decision in the case of In re Janis supported the application of quasi community property in Arizona by confirming that a condominium located in Hawaii by an Arizona married couple constituted quasi community property.


Separate Property in an Arizona Divorce

There is a presumption that any property acquired by either party prior to the date of marriage or subsequent to the date the divorce petition was served is the sole and separate property of the person acquiring that property.  The same presumption applies to debts as well.

Additionally, gifts and inheritances received by either spouse during the marriage is presumed to be the sole and separate property of the person receiving the gift or inheritance.  It is important to understand that the spouse who received a gift or inheritance during the marriage has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that such property was a gift or the result of an inheritance because there is a general presumption that any property acquired during marriage is community property.

Arizona Community Property Laws Faq

Acquiring Community Property in Arizona

Generally, all property acquired during the parties’ marriage, with some exception, is presumed to be community property. The spouse attempting to overcome that presumption must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the property is his or her separate property.

Some of the exceptions to the general rule that all property acquired during marriage is community property is when a spouse receives a gift from the other spouse, receives an inheritance, purchases property with his or her separate property, or receives an award for personal injury damages, in which case those items are the sole and separate property of the spouse receiving that property.

Some of the more complex valuation issues in dividing community property in Arizona pertain to the value of a business and division of stock options. You should read our article on the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in the Brebaugh v. Deane case on how stock options are divided in a divorce in Arizona.

“You should read our article entitled “Disclaimer Deed and Divorce” regarding how a community property interest in a home can be waived; thereby granting the home to the other spouse as their sole and separate property. You may also want to read our article on the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in Malecky v. Malecky on how a wife waived her community property interest on house purchased during the parties’ marriage.

Malecky v. Malecky Explained

The Arizona Supreme Court in the case of Schwartz v. Schwartz has held that title under which an asset acquired during marriage is held (i.e., title to a car being in one spouse’s name only) does not have an impact on the nature of that asset being community property.

There is an important rule that applies to the purchase of a home during a marriage. The Arizona Court of Appeals in the case of Bell-Killbourne v. Bell-Killbourne held that parties are free to change the character of their property from community property to a spouse’s sole and separate property.

In that case, the Appellate Court held that a spouse’s signing of a Disclaimer Deed to purchase a home during the marriage was enforceable such that the spouse who signed the Disclaimer Deed at the time the home was purchased waived any community property interest in that home; thereby making the home the other spouse’s sole and separate property.

Arizona court’s also recognize the creation of a community lien against a spouse’s sole and separate property whenever community money or effort was used to increase the value of that sole and separate property. You may wish to read our article on the creation and valuation of community liens, as well as the counter argument of “fair compensation” to defeat such community property liens in sole and separate property.


Converting Separate Property into Community Property

Spouses in Arizona are permitted to change the legal characterization of their property either intentionally or unintentionally. For example, a spouse may intentionally gift their separate property to the community when, for example, a spouse owned a home prior to marriage and places his wife’s name on the deed to the home with the intent of gifting that sole and separate home to the community.

The Arizona Court of Appeals in the Flowers case, however, held that although a sole and separate home was turned into community property during the marriage, a trial court may have the authority to award 100% of that home to the spouse who originally owned it as sole and separate property if it proven it is equitable to do so.

Another common way separate property is converted into community property is when the separate property is so commingled with community property that it becomes impossible to distinguish between the two.

This commonly occurs in bank and investment accounts when paychecks are commingled with funds held in a sole and separate account owned prior to marriage and there is a subsequent continual influx of community monies into the account and outflows of funds for either community or sole and separate expenses.
Arizona Community Property Law
Commingling issues can become very complicated. For example, if one spouse had an account prior to marriage, used the money to buy a car that was titled only in her sole name during the marriage, and never commingled community funds in the account used to purchase that car, the car would continue to remain her separate.

However, if she had so commingled community funds in that same account such that it was impossible to distinguish the separate from the community funds held within that account, the car would then be considered to be community property.

You should also be aware that the Arizona Supreme Court in the Van Loan v. Van Loan case did not apply the same commingling analysis to retirement accounts such that it does not matter if post marriage deposits are made into what was a previously sole and separate retirement account.

The court is required to separate the sole and separate portion from the community portion, award the sole and separate portion to the spouse who earned it, and divide the community portion between the parties.


Community Property Interest in Sole and Separate Property

The community may gain an interest in a spouse’s sole and separate property. For example, if community funds are used to pay the mortgage on a spouse’s sole and separate home during the marriage, the community may have a community lien to the extent those payments reduced the outstanding balance owed on the mortgage from the date of marriage to the date of divorce.

Also, if improvements were made to the home during the marriage with community funds then a community lien could exist to the extent those improvements increased the value of the home.

Also, the community may have a lien against a spouse’s sole and separate business if that sole and separate business experiences an increase in value and/or produces more income than prior to the marriage. If that increased value and/or income was not due to the efforts of the spouse during marriage, then both the increased value and increased income remain the sole and separate property of that spouse.
Community Property Laws
However, if that increase in value is wholly or even partly due to the efforts of the spouse during marriages, then the community would have a community lien on the increase in value and/or income of the busines to the extent attributable to the spouse’s efforts during the marriage.

Under both of the above scenarios, there is a defense to whether the community should be compensated for such community liens. Primarily, the community lien can be partly or completely offset if the owner of that separate property can demonstrate the community has already been fairly compensated during the marriage to the extent of the value of that community lien.

To learn more about community liens in separate property, please read our article entitled “Community Liens in Sole and Separate Property in Arizona” discussing the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in the Potthoff v. Potthoff case..


Dividing Community Property in an Arizona Divorce

The trial court has broad discretion to effectuate a fair and equitable division of community property. Although the court is required to divide the property equitably, it does not necessarily have to divide the property equally.

The court may effectuate an unequal distribution of community property when, for example, the court finds a spouse has committed waste of community assets during marriage or has concealed or destroyed community property.

The court can effectuate the fair and equitable distribution of property “in kind”; meaning the court will not cut every asset in half but, instead, may award Wife all of her bank accounts, award Husband all of his bank accounts, then award an equalization payment to be paid by one spouse to the other to make the award of those accounts and the balances in those accounts equal.
Community Property Law
There are some assets accumulated during marriage that cannot be divided in a divorce in Arizona.  For example, military disability pay may not be divided in an Arizona divorce.  However, the Arizona Supreme Court in the unpublished Merrill v. Merrill decision ruled that a spouse who elects to change from receiving Military Retirement Pay to Combat Related Special Compensation Pay may still have to reimburse his or her spouse for the retirement benefit he or she would otherwise have received.

For more information on how to enforce a property settlement agreement, please read our article entitled “How to Enforce a Property Settlement Agreement in Arizona”.

Please also read my other indepth article entitled “Can You Sell Your Home During a Divorce in Arizona” to learn about very important Arizona laws that may preclude you from selling community property during the pendency of a divorce in Arizona.


Contact Our Scottsdale Arizona Community Property Attorneys

Contact us today at (480) 305-8300 to schedule your consultation with one of our Scottsdale Arizona community property attorneys regarding Arizona community property or any other Arizona family law matter.