In California, when a spouse dies, the surviving spouse generally has the right to transfer assets and property in their name but there are exceptions. First, the surviving spouse would need a certified copy of your spouse's death certificate and certificates of marriage to show that you married the deceased.
California is a community property state, as such upon the death of a spouse, the surviving spouse is entitled to one-half of the community property. Pursuant to California Family Code section 760, community property is defined as “all property, real or personal, wherever situated, acquired by a married person during the marriage while domiciled in the state.” At the end of a divorce, community property is generally split 50/50.
In California, if a spouse dies intestate, meaning there is no will or trust, then surviving spouses may inherit half of the community property, as well as, one-half of the deceased spouse's separate property.
In California you generally cannot disinherit a spouse unless, your spouse waived such rights to inherit from you in a valid, signed agreement, known as a "pre-marital agreement".
For more information regarding the rights of a surviving spouse or probate in California, we invite you to contact a California probate attorney at KAASS LAW today at (310) 943-1171.
In today's mobile world, people might live and work in many countries during their careers. The citizen first acquires property in one state as a single person. Later, they marry and acquire property in other states, building a community of assets.
California Probate Code Section 100 states that half of the community property belongs to the surviving spouse. The other half belongs to the decedent.[1] Division 2 of the Section allows spouses to agree in writing on dividing community property. They can divide based on the aggregate value or individual assets. The subdivision does not authorize or recognize a non-pro-rata division of property without a written agreement.
If spouses die leaving or quasi-community property and no clear and compelling proof shows which spouse survived the other, California law may divide the property equally: [2]
The manufactured home once known as a mobile home is a popular dwelling place for many. Builders construct modern manufactured homes according to strict building standards that have evolved nationally since 1976. Unlike conventional "site-built" houses, fabricated models often come with their own warranty forms. Furthermore, 38 states, including California, have rules and regulations regulating manufactured home-building and guarantee systems. In 1958, California itself led the way in the oversight of manufactured home construction.
California does a remarkable job of ensuring the protection by multiple laws and codes of manufactured homeowners. The existence of the Senate Select Committee on Manufactured Home Communities is one unusual feature of manufactured home ownership in California. This is a standing committee which studies the need for legislation and makes recommendations to the Legislature as necessary. The Department of Housing and Community Development is in charge of the California Manufactured Housing Protection and Assistance Program. Which is in charge of enforcing rules and regulations in order to put California's manufactured housing laws and codes into effect. The Department, in particular, had also adopt building standards that are compatible with known and approved standards. As published in the most recent editions of industry codes that are uniform or international.
Joint and several liabilities are a legal principle which applies in some states. Under California the definition of joint and several liability is clear. Law suits arising from mishaps on a building site may be extremely difficult cases. This is because the responsibility for the incident can be divided between several parties. For instance, if a wall fails, the general contractor may have provided incorrect instructions; the engineers may have used a flawed design; the concrete subcontractor may have used the wrong type of cement; or a coworker may have made a mistake. The list could actually grow to include lots of parties. How does the law sort out liability in a complex dispute if there is more than one party to blame? One or more parties may be held liable individually for the entire amount of damages suffered by a claimant for personal injury. In the event this responsibility is regardless of their own degree of blame. It means that a defendant can be held liable for 100% percent of your negligence even though they were responsible for your injury for only 15% percent. In the event that you receive only from one jointly and severally liable party, then the defendant will compel any other responsible party to request donation.
There has been a lot of discussion about the privacy protections provided by the 2018 California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). Nevertheless, perhaps one of the CCPA's most relevant provisions will be one that has been somewhat overlooked: Section 1798.150, which allows for statutory damages of between $100 (US dollars) and $750 (US dollars) per user for certain data breaches per event. Indeed, if California had adopted Section 1798.150 alone, it would have gained dozens of studies on how its statutory remedy for damages would possibly lead to an increase in private class action "bet-the-company" lawsuits over data breaches. It has resulted in commentators spending less time analyzing its impact on businesses because it was enacted as just one provision in a first in the nation privacy law.
Conversion is an intentional interference with the property of another person with the intention to deprive the owner of the property. This includes situations when someone uses the property of another and damages or destroys it. During an act of conversion, taking the property may be lawful, while keeping the property and/or returning the property in a damaged state is unlawful.
According to CACI 2100 the plaintiff must be able to prove the following elements to establish the claim.
The plaintiff generally must establish an actual interference with his ownership or right to possess property to prove the conversion. In addition to actual interference the plaintiff must also show that the interference was substantial, which can prove by showing an intention or purpose to keep the owner from taking possession of the property or to convert the goods and to exercise ownership over them.
California Penal Code 135 makes it is illegal to willfully and knowingly destroy or conceal any form of evidence that is to be used in a trial or government investigation.
Destroying evidence is prohibited in both civil and criminal cases, including contract dispute litigation or divorce. As noted above this charge applies to evidence which is used in trial or government investigation.
In order for a defendant to be convicted of Penal Code 135 PC destroying or concealing evidence the prosecutor must be able to prove the following elements:
The transfer of community and quasi-community assets to a revocable trust assumes those assets maintain their overall character for any division established by the trust, according to Sections 100 and 101. This section applies to all transactions made before, on, or after January 1, 2000. [1] California Probate Code Section 100 [2] California Probate Code Section 103 KAASS LAW helps navigate California's Probate Code, guide community property division, draft agreements, manage revocable trusts, and ensure legal compliance.
In California, attorneys often place special emphasis on addressing the unique legal and financial considerations that arise in mixed marriages. That is, where one of the spouses is a foreign national or resides outside the state. In such cases, a conflict of jurisdiction may arise in the division of property upon the death of one spouse. California law treats property acquired in other states as community property. If the spouses subsequently resided in California. This provision is important in the case of inheritance, especially if the heirs have a dispute over ownership.
Another critical issue is the debt obligations of the deceased. Under California law, debts incurred during the marriage can be collected from the surviving spouse's share of the community property. However, creditors must go through the process of notice and filing claims with the probate court. To protect their assets, spouses are encouraged to enter into a prenuptial agreement or property settlement agreement in advance.
It is not uncommon for relatives of a deceased person to dispute the surviving spouse's right to a piece of property. Especially when there is no will. In such cases, California courts consider both the language of the will and the intent of the spouses to divide or not divide the property. The law allows for the consideration of:
If they can be corroborated by witnesses.
The death of a spouse may have tax implications. For example, the capital gains tax on the sale of an inherited property may be reduced. This is due to the increased value. This becomes especially important when clients need to make decisions about real estate or investments they acquired jointly, as clear guidance can help avoid future disputes and ensure a fair distribution. It should be noted, however, that the tax rules vary depending on the type and nature of the property.
Properly drafting a joint property and will can greatly simplify the process of dividing assets upon the death of a spouse. KAASS LAW can:
In addition, our team advises clients on the most effective strategies for distributing their assets while minimizing tax burdens.
The saying "as is the case with California, so is the nation" applies to manufactured homes and to their warranties. Early September 1, 1958, no manufactured home could be marketed or built in California unless it met with state building regulations. In 1976, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development adopted federal regulations for manufactured homes, partly based on the standards of California.
The Golden State has always been regarded as customer friendly and for manufactured home guarantees this is no different. The California Civil Code's Sections 1797 through 1797.7 regulate manufactured home builders and the warranty coverage they must provide. For one, homebuilders, contractors and dealers imported by California have to respect warranties they offer on such homes. At a minimum, home warranties made in California cover "substantial material and workmanship defects" in a variety of home systems.
The home warranties provided by Golden State include plumbing, electrical, fire safety, ventilation, heating and structural systems. In addition, all appliances built in or produced by a manufactured home builder, or their contractors or suppliers have protection by the California guarantee rules. Manufactured home warranties in California extend to their customer for one year from the day a home is shipped. You have one year and 10 days from the date of delivery of your manufactured home to inform your manufacturer, in writing, of any defects.
If your home made in California has a flaw protected by the State's warranty provisions, report to your dealer or supplier first. The Golden State needs manufactured home builders and their dealers to take appropriate action to fix any defects associated with the warranties. The Mobile home Ombudsman's office in California also helps manufactured homeowners cope with warranty and other issues.
In addition to the mandatory one-year warranty, some manufacturers offer voluntary or extended warranties on modular homes. These warranties may cover individual components, including:
Terms range from two to ten years. However, the terms of such warranties usually depend on the specific manufacturer. Buyers should study them carefully before signing a contract. For example, failure to comply with the maintenance requirements specified in the manufacturer's instructions may void the warranty. It is important to note that extended warranties are often arranged through third-party insurance companies rather than directly with the builder.
Once the modular home has been delivered to the site, a technical inspection is recommended. Although not required by law, such a measure allows for the timely identification of hidden defects. This information can be critical when seeking warranty repairs. More information about inspections can be found on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) The buyer must also keep all documents related to the purchase and installation, such as:
This will facilitate the claims process. Our attorneys are available to advise you at any stage. In addition, we recommend that you read the Federal Trade Commission's recommendations for understanding warranty rights.
If you or a loved one has been harmed as the result of another's negligence, then you may be entitled to compensation. If that is the case, contact our Glendale personal injury lawyer today for a consultation and case review. A warranty lawsuit is an extremely complex legal process. Please feel free to give our office a call at 310.943.1171. KAASS LAW helps homeowners address warranty issues, fix defective manufactured homes, and navigate California's complex building regulations.
Many states in USA have a simple law of several liability in which each party pays only damages up to the degree of their relative accident fault. You have laws in other states like a tortfeasor that settles with a plaintiff giving up his or her right to appeal from any other tortfeasors. Joint and several liability in California is an adapted version of the old version of common law. This says more than one party can be collectively liable for the full amount of your economic damage but only individually (severally) liable for your non-economic damage in proportion to your percentage of blame. The remainder of the tortfeasors are, however, then entitled to a setoff for whatever the settlement amount is. In other words, the expense of the verdict is subtracted from any jury award.
Parties found liable for the accident are considered as tortfeasors. Basically a tortfeasor is someone who does a type of torture. If the tortfeasor is found liable, the plaintiff must be compensated for his negligence and physical harm. In a civil case, terror perpetrators are named defendants. If there are many tortfeasors in a case, the car-accident counsel in California will be the one who guarantees that they are all identified in the complaint.
There are definitely several joint and several liability opponents there. One reason for these is the risk of serious inequality arising from it. A good example is a defendant who is at fault of only 10 percent, but who is jointly and severally liable with another defendant who is at fault of 90 percent, yet may end up with full financial responsibility if the 90 percent defendant is judgment-proof.
California Civil Code §1798.82 allows individuals or businesses in California to notify citizens if a person experiences a security breach. Interestingly, section 1798.82(h) describes “personal information” as much narrower than that of the CCPA, to be either of:
The legislation mandates that notification be given to the affected individuals within the most expedient time possible and without delay. Or any appropriate action to assess the extent of the violation and restore the data system's fair integrity.
Section 1798.81.5 of the California Civil Code specifies that "a company that owns, licenses or preserves personal information about a citizen of California shall adopt and retain reasonable security procedures and practices relevant to the nature of the information to protect personal information from unauthorized access, destruction, usage, alteration or release". The law also requires that any business that discloses personal information under a non-affiliated third party contract requires that non-affiliated third party implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices.
Before the California Consumer Privacy Act, there was a private right of action for data breach disclosure breaches and information. California Civil Code Articles 1798.84(b). Nevertheless, this private right of action does not provide for statutory damages.
The difference between a cause of action for conversion and for trespass against personal property turns on the degree of the defendant's interference with the plaintiff's rights in the property. In the case of conversion, it is essential to prove that the defendant actually and substantially has exercised control over the plaintiff's personal property, interfered with the plaintiff's rights in the property. In contrast, any illegal interference or exercise of control over the personal property of another person can give rise to a cause of action for trespass. After a property has been converted, the injured party can choose to either sue the defendant for the tort, or waive the tort and sue in "assumpsit" either for money had and received or the value of the property converted.
Conversion does not necessarily simply mean theft of the property, it is more related to actual interference with the victim’s possession or ownership rights rather than just theft. Examples of conduct which includes in the claim:
Evidence of the cost of the property, along with other circumstances such as the condition of the property ant the extent of its use can be considered essential in determining the value of the property at the time of the conversion.
For any further legal assistance, KAASS LAW is here to help!
In case the defendant destroyed the evidence when no legal investigation or trial was in process, and later it turned out that the destroyed thing could be used as an evidence in an investigation process that began later he can’t be convicted under Penal Code 135 PC.
A person can be convicted for Penal Code 135 PC intentionally destroying almost any type of evidence such as
It is important to mention that destroying or concealing evidence is not like other California crimes where a person can be charged for attempting to commit a crime. In order to be convicted under California Penal Code Section 135, defendant must have been successful at destroying or concealing the evidence. An unsuccessful attempt to destroy or conceal evidence in California will not lead to a conviction.
There are several common legal defenses for CA Penal Code 135 which including some of the following:
In case defendant wasn’t aware that there was an active criminal investigation when he destroyed or concealed the item of the question, he cannot be convicted of this crime.
In case the evidence was destroyed or concealed accidently and the defendant didn’t act consciously he should not be convicted of this crime.
In case the evidence survived destruction or it was possible to restore it, then the defendant cannot be convicted of concealing or destroying evidence.
Penalties for Penal Code 135 destroying or concealing evidence is a misdemeanor in California Law. The penalties are the following:
The penalties can be leveled in conjunction with penalties for any other crime defendant is accused of. Additionally defendant usually faces to other penalties, such as a 3 year probation period, community service, restitution, civil lawsuits, negative professional licensing consequences, immigration consequences and more.
Hire the most dedicated Glendale criminal defense lawyer who has experience with Penal Code 135 PC cases. You can rely on our experienced California Penal Code 135 PC defense Lawyer to carefully analyze the facts of your case to prove the facts necessary. We back all of our clients and we invite you to give us a toll free call at (310) 943-1171 to speak to our experienced attorney today. Get in touch with us at KAASS LAW, 815 E Colorado St #220, Glendale, CA 91205, (310) 943-1171.