Marriage of Nguyen and Pham
Filed 8/23/06 Marriage of Nguyen and Pham CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| In re Marriage of BENJAMIN B. NGUYEN and KIMANH THI PHAM. | |
| BENJAMIN B. NGUYEN, Respondent, v. KIMANH THI PHAM, Appellant. | G036127 (Super. Ct. No. 00D004007) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Josephine S. Tucker, Judge. Affirmed.
Buddy Clark for Appellant.
Bill T. Tran & Associates and Bill T. Tran for Respondent.
* * *
The court entered a judgment of dissolution of marriage that did not address any property rights. More than four and a half years later, the wife sought a determination of property rights, requesting a community property interest in the marital residence, plus an amount equal to the husband's equity interest in the property. After a trial on the matter, the court denied the wife's request, on account of her having quitclaimed her interest in the property to the husband at the time of acquisition. The wife appeals.
Substantial evidence supports the trial court's findings that the wife signed the quitclaim deed with a full understanding of its effect, so as to rebut the presumption of undue influence that arose on the husband's acquisition of the property as his sole and separate property. Since the court properly held that the wife had transmuted any interest she had in the property to the separate property of the husband, she was not entitled to any reimbursement under Family Code section 2640, subdivision (c). We affirm.
I
FACTS
Benjamin B. Nguyen (Benjamin) and KimAnh Thi Pham (KimAnh)[1] were married to each other for the first time on January 19, 1988. They had a son born in 1991. Their first marriage was dissolved on September 1, 1993.
Benjamin and KimAnh married each other for the second time on March 18, 1998. By grant deed recorded on June 30, 1998, Benjamin acquired a piece of property in Santa Ana as his sole and separate property. By quitclaim deed also recorded on June 30, 1998, KimAnh conveyed any interest she had in the property to Benjamin as his sole and separate property.
Benjamin, in propria persona, filed a petition for dissolution of their second marriage on April 26, 2000. In his petition for dissolution, he identified as his separate property assets the Santa Ana residence, equity from a second taken out on the property, a truck, a checking account, a savings account, and a thrift savings plan. He stated that there were no community assets.
On June 13, 2000, Benjamin, still in propria persona, filed a declaration for default or uncontested dissolution, an amended schedule of assets and debts, and a request for entry of default. In his amended schedule of assets and debts, he stated that the residence had a fair market value of $250,000 and was subject to a $195,000 first deed of trust and a $22,639 second.
On June 13, 2000, the court entered judgment terminating the marital status as of October 28, 2000. The judgment did not address any property rights.
Three years later, Benjamin and KimAnh entered into a stipulation and order re child custody, visitation and support. The stipulation and order was filed on July 10, 2003.
On February 16, 2005, more than four and a half years after the judgment dissolving the second marriage was entered, KimAnh filed an OSC seeking a postjudgment determination of property rights. KimAnh sought an order determining that the Santa Ana property was community property in which she had an ownership interest and a further order awarding to her an amount equal to Benjamin's equity share in the property, which she said was due her on account of his concealment of the property.
In support of her request, KimAnh stated that she did not speak English very well or understand the law. She also said that she did not have legal representation at the time Benjamin filed for dissolution. KimAnh further declared: â€
