The Faulstich Law Firm P.C.
130 S. Bemiston
Suite 604
Clayton, MO 63105
(314) 260-7823
The Faulstich Law Firm P.C.
130 S. Bemiston
Suite 604
Clayton, MO 63105
(314) 260-7823
The Faulstich Law Firm. St. Louis Family Law Attorneys.
My Blog
Posted on May 30, 2013 at 3:51 PM |
![]() |
Simply put, in Missouri, marital
property is property that is acquired during the marriage and non-marital
property is property acquired before the marriage. However, for every rule,
there are exceptions. This rule has a number of exceptions, some obvious
and others not so obvious. The emphasis here however, will be about how marital
property is decided in the court of law in Missouri. For
many rules of law, there are statutory presumptions, which are default rules
about what happens absent any evidence to the contrary. Marital property law
has a couple of statutory presumptions. The first presumption is that, absent
any evidence to the contrary, property acquired after the date of marriage is
marital property. Evidence to the contrary would be evidence of the exceptions
alluded to in the first paragraph of this blog. The second presumption is
that any property acquired before the marriage is non-marital property, meaning
your spouse cannot reach that asset unless she/he can prove that this property
is now marital property. This sometimes happens with mingling of assets, and
there are a number of exceptions here. The idea that a spouse can reach
assets you acquired before marriage is probably one of the most frustrating and
least intuitive ideas in the law here. In a
recent case, called Cooper v. Cooper, two spouses were litigating over three
very large assets. One of those assets was a small business bought a year after
the marriage and titled in husband and wife’s name. The husband said, but gave
no other proof that, he had paid for the business with an asset that he had
before marriage and therefore the business was his separate, non-marital
property. Other than his word, he offered nothing however, and the Court can
choose to believe or not believe what he proffers here. Without documentation,
the Court would probably be less likely to do so. Because of his failure to
provide the necessary evidence to the contrary, the presumption fell in Wife’s
favor, and the asset was distributed evenly. In other words, because the
business was bought during the marriage, the presumption was that it was
equally the property of Husband and Wife. Therefore husband had to split the
property with wife rather than take it as his own, which he might have been
able to do had he offered better evidence and tipped the presumption. BOTTOM LINE: Good evidence is important always, but more
important when you need to overcome the presumption that something is a marital
asset. |