Marriage of Nelson
Filed 5/11/06; pub. order 5/31/06 (see end of opn.)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re Marriage of CHARLES and ARISTA B. NELSON. | H028352 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 1-96-FL057242) |
CHARLES NELSON, Respondent, v. ARISTA B. NELSON, Appellant. |
In a dissolution-of-marriage proceeding following a contested trial, the trial court divided community property, confirmed separate property, and ordered Charles Nelson to pay Arista Nelson spousal support of $2,000 per month. Arista[1] appeals from the judgment. She contends that the trial court erred by (1) valuing her sole proprietorship business as of the date of separation rather than trial, (2) determining that the marital residence was entirely Charles's separate property, and (3) failing to consider the parties' standard of living during marriage in arriving at the spousal-support amount. We agree in part with Arista's marital-residence issue. We therefore modify and affirm the judgment.
background
Charles (then 48 years old) and Arista (then 28 years old) married in 1982. Charles had purchased the marital home in 1965 for $47,500, using a mortgage loan of $39,000 for which the monthly payment was $250. At the time of the marriage, the mortgage balance was $14,725. The parties paid off the balance in 1988, the year in which Arista began a retail business known as Arista's Flowers and Dolls. The business was never profitable. The parties separated in 1999. After separation, Arista moved the retail business to another location and incurred $41,000 for moving costs and expenses. She closed the business in 2004, shortly before trial.
date of business valuation
Pursuant to Family Code section 2552,[2] subdivision (a), the general rule is that community assets must be valued â€
