BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 380
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
380 (Waldron)
As Amended May 14, 2015
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |79-0 |(April 13, |SENATE: |39-0 |(July 6, 2015) |
| | |2015) | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: JUD.
SUMMARY: Limits who may be declared a putative spouse.
Specifically, this bill provides that a court, in a proceeding to
nullify a void or voidable marriage, may not declare parties to be
putative spouses or divide property as if the marriage had not
been void or voidable, unless requested to do so by the party or
parties who believed in good faith that the marriage was valid.
The Senate amendments were technical and clarifying.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Defines marriages that are either void (involving incest or
bigamy) or voidable (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).
AB 380
Page 2
2)Provides a procedure to nullify a void or voidable marriage.
3)Requires a court, if a determination is made that a marriage is
void or voidable and either party believed in good faith that
the marriage was valid, to declare that party or parties to have
the status of putative spouse (the party or parties who believed
in good faith that the marriage was valid) and to divide the
property that would have been community property if the marriage
had been valid as if it were community property.
4)Allows for an award of spousal support in the same manner as if
the marriage had not been void or voidable, but only to a
putative spouse.
5)Allows an award of attorneys' fees for nullity of a void or
voidable marriage, but only to a party found to be innocent of
fraud or wrongdoing in inducing or entering the marriage and
free from knowledge of any matter for which nullity is sought.
6)Defines community property as all property acquired by a married
person during the marriage, and provides that community property
is to be divided to the parties equally on dissolution of the
marriage.
FISCAL EFFECT: None
COMMENTS: A putative spouse is a spouse of a void or voidable
marriage who believed in good faith that the marriage was valid.
This bill clarifies that a court may not declare a party to be a
putative spouse or divide property as though the parties were
legally married unless requested to do so by the innocent or
putative spouse. In support of this bill, the author writes that
this bill "avoids the unfair result that a spouse who knew the
marriage was void (e.g., a party who was already married) would be
AB 380
Page 3
able to benefit from his or her fraud, as at least one court has
interpreted the statute's current language."
Brief Explanation of Void or Voidable Marriages. A marriage
between close relatives - parents and children, siblings, and
aunts or uncles and nieces or nephews - is void as matter of law,
as is a marriage to someone who is already married. In addition,
certain marriages are voidable and can be nullified. A marriage
is voidable if:
1)One party could not consent to the marriage, was of unsound mind
or was not physically capable of "entering into the marriage
state";
2)One party's previous spouse, who was thought to be dead, was
not; or
3)Consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud or force.
Void and voidable marriages are terminated when a court determines
them to be a nullity at which point the parties are returned to an
unmarried state.
Putative Spouse Doctrine. If a court determines that a marriage
is void or voidable and that either or both parties believed in
good faith that the marriage was valid, the court can declare
those parties putative parties and can divide the property as
though they had been married (dividing the "quasi-community
property" between the parties). In addition, the court can order
spousal support paid to a putative spouse and can award attorney's
fees, if appropriate, to the spouse found "innocent of fraud or
wrongdoing" (essentially the putative spouse). While the spousal
support and attorney's fees provisions specifically limit an award
to the innocent or putative spouse, the property division statute
does not specifically limit the choice to divide property as
though the parties were married to the putative spouse.
AB 380
Page 4
A California court of appeals summed up the policy reasons behind
the putative spouse doctrine. Its reasoning also explains the
need for this bill:
The putative spouse doctrine is "an equitable doctrine
first recognized by the judiciary, and later codified by
the Legislature." In 1943, our Supreme Court stated
that "[i]t is well settled that a woman who lives with a
man as his wife in the belief that a valid marriage
exists, is entitled upon termination of their
relationship to share in the property acquired by them
during its existence."
The doctrine, however, cannot be invoked unless the
putative spouse has a good faith belief in the existence
of a valid marriage...
The purpose of the doctrine is to protect the "innocent"
party or parties of an invalid marriage from losing
community property rights... This conclusion is dictated
by simple justice, for where persons domiciled in such a
jurisdiction, believing themselves to be lawfully
married to each other, acquire property as the result of
their joint efforts, they have impliedly adopted... the
rule of an equal division of their acquisitions, and the
expectation of such a division should not be defeated in
the case of innocent persons." (In re Marriage of Guo
and Sun (2010) 186 Cal. App. 4th 1491, 1496 (citations
omitted).)
California Supreme Court Clarifies That Good Faith Standard is
Subjective. In a recent case, a unanimous California Supreme
Court clarified that when making a determination as to a party's
good faith belief in the marriage, the court must consider a
subjective standard and not an objective standard. In explaining
the subjective standard, the court held:
AB 380
Page 5
The good faith inquiry is a subjective one that focuses
on the actual state of mind of the alleged putative
spouse. While there is no requirement that the claimed
belief be objectively reasonable, good faith is a
relative quality and depends on all the relevant
circumstances, including objective circumstances. In
determining good faith, the trial court must consider
the totality of the circumstances, including the efforts
made to create a valid marriage, the alleged putative
spouse's personal background and experience, and all the
circumstances surrounding the marriage. Although the
claimed belief need not pass a reasonable person test,
the reasonableness or unreasonableness of one's belief
in the face of objective circumstances pointing to a
marriage's invalidity is a factor properly considered as
part of the totality of the circumstances in determining
whether the belief was genuinely and honestly held.
(Ceja v. Rudolph & Sletten (2013) 56 Cal.4th 1113,
1128.)
Analysis Prepared by:
Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN:
0001017