- 12 -
Under our Corporations Code �15026 a partnership
interest is classified as "personal property." While
it is sometimes necessary to probate personal property
belonging to a decedent who was not domiciled in
California, California will apply the law of the
decedent's domicile for purposes of determining
intestate succession. Accordingly if we take the view
that title to the property in Bard was really held by
the partnership (rather than in tenancy-in-common),
California will apply Arizona law. As I understand it
from our earlier conversation, then the decedent’s
children would in effect take 1/4 of decedent’s
partnership interest.
On the other hand, if we can take the position
that the property was not at the time of the decedent’s
death truly a partnership asset, but was held (as title
reflects) by the decedent as tenants-in-common with his
mother, then California law will apply, and if the
decedent’s interest is community, that interest will
pass entirely to the spouse. * * *
On April 8, 1991, petitioner filed a spousal property
petition in the Superior Court of California, County of Imperial
(the California court), averring that the Bard property was
community property. The petition also requested the California
court (1) to determine that a one-half interest in the Bard
property passed from decedent to petitioner by intestate
succession and (2) to confirm that the remaining one-half
interest was petitioner’s in her own right. A hearing was
scheduled for April 26, 1991. Notice of hearing was given to
petitioner and to decedent's two sons, Mark and Rodney Kenly. No
notice was given to any of decedent's grandchildren. A hearing
was held on April 26, 1991. No one asked to be heard, and no one
opposed the petition. The petition was granted, the judge
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011