BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        AB 380|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                   THIRD READING 


          Bill No:  AB 380
          Author:   Waldron (R)
          Amended:  5/14/15 in Senate
          Vote:     21  

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  7-0, 6/16/15
           AYES:  Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning,  
            Wieckowski

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  79-0, 4/13/15 (Consent) - See last page for  
            vote

           SUBJECT:   Marriage: putative spouses


          SOURCE:    Conference of California Bar Associations

          DIGEST:  This bill requires the court, only upon request of a  
          party who is declared a putative spouse, to divide the  
          quasi-marital property that would have been community property  
          or quasi-community property if the marriage was valid as if it  
          were community property.

          ANALYSIS:
               
          Existing law:

          1)Defines marriages that are either void (i.e., involving incest  
            or bigamy) or voidable (e.g., including marriages in which one  
            party was incapable of consent, the spouse of one party was  
            absent for at least five years, or consent obtained by fraud  
            or force).  (Fam. Code Secs. 2200-01.)









                                                                     AB 380  
                                                                    Page  2


          2)Provides that if a marriage is void or voidable and either  
            party believed in good faith that the marriage was valid, the  
            court must declare the party or parties to have the status of  
            putative spouse, and divide the property that would have been  
            community property if the marriage was valid as if it were  
            community property.  (Fam. Code Sec. 2251.)

          This bill: 

          1)Prohibits, for the purposes of community property, the court  
            from determining that a spouse was putative unless he or she  
            personally had a good faith belief that the marriage was  
            valid. 

          2)Prohibits the court from dividing property as if the marriage  
            had been valid unless requested to do so by a putative spouse.  
             

          Background
          
          The California Family Code defines legal marriage as a "personal  
          relation arising out of a civil contract between two persons, to  
          which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract  
          is necessary." (Fam. Code Sec. 300.) Although marriage is  
          generally treated as a private and personal decision, the courts  
          have long held that the state has an important interest in the  
          institution of marriage, and has therefore regulated limits for  
          those who can marry based on a variety of factors, including  
          age, affinity, consanguinity, and mental capacity. 

          The putative spouse doctrine is considered a remedial device to  
          validate an otherwise invalid marriage. Exercising equitable  
          powers, the courts have invoked the putative spouse doctrine to  
          protect those who in good faith, attempted to comply with the  
          formalities required for valid marriage. In general, the  
          doctrine applies when at least one of the parties has a good  
          faith belief in the existence of a legal marriage. Even before  
          its codification by the Legislature in 1969, the courts applied  
          the doctrine to both void and voidable marriages. The  
          codification of the putative spouse doctrine was part of a  
          comprehensive revision of California's family laws which  
          included the introduction of no-fault divorce.  Thus, prior to  
          1970, fault impacted the division of property in a divorce,  
          entitling the "innocent" spouse to a greater share of the  







                                                                     AB 380  
                                                                    Page  3


          community property. 

          In In re Marriage of Tejeda (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 973, the  
          Court of Appeal looked at the case of a bigamous husband and  
          innocent wife living in a putative marriage for over 30 years.   
          When the husband petitioned for dissolution, the wife petitioned  
          for nullification and requested that property titled in her name  
          be confirmed as her separate property. The Court found the  
          putative spouse statute was clear and unambiguous, requiring  
          that upon a finding that one spouse has a good faith belief in  
          the existence of a legal marriage, the union itself becomes a  
          putative marriage.  The property acquired during the putative  
          marriage, although titled in the innocent wife's name, was then  
          characterized as quasi-marital property and divided equally  
          between the spouses. 

          This bill, seeks to better protect "innocent" spouses by  
          amending the Family Code to provide that only a putative spouse,  
          who believed in good faith that the marriage was valid, can  
          elect to have quasi-community property divided equally between  
          the spouses. 

          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          SUPPORT:   (Verified6/19/15)


          Conference of California Bar Associations (source)
          Association of Certified Family Law Specialists
          Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar 


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified6/19/15)


          None received


          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:      The Association of Certified Family  
          Law Specialists writes that this bill ensures that "a party who  
          did not believe in good faith that the marriage was valid shall  
          not be entitled to the status of putative spouse and shall not  







                                                                     AB 380  
                                                                    Page  4


          be entitled to request the court to issue an order dividing the  
          property that 'would have been' community or quasi-community  
          property."

          ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  79-0, 4/13/15
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang,  
            Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle,  
            Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina  
            Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez,  
            Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin,  
            Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low,  
            Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,  
            Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea,  
            Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,  
            Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,  
            Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Harper

          Prepared by:Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
          6/19/15 13:34:18
                                   ****  END  ****