- 9 -
allocated to petitioner is noninvestment community property.
Petitioner, however, testified that he inherited the ranch from
his father. In addition, section 7, paragraph 11 of the
Settlement Agreement states that the ranch land is the "sole and
separate property" of the petitioner. Property acquired by
bequest or devise is ordinarily that spouse's separate property.
See In re Estate of Salvini, 397 P.2d 811 (Wash. 1964).
Therefore, the ranch is not community property, and Linda
Armacost had no right to receive payment for any interest in the
property. See Poe v. Seaborn, 282 U.S. 101 (1930); Hansen v.
Blevins, 367 P.2d 758 (Idaho 1962); In re Estate of Salvini,
supra. Because petitioner already owned the ranch in its
entirety, we find that no part of the $250,000 note is
attributable to the acquisition of this property.
Next, we look at the condominium unit situated in Liberty
Lake. Respondent argues that a condominium unit valued at
$247,000 was allocated to petitioner as noninvestment property.
Petitioner, however, contends that the property located in
Liberty Lake was not actually a condominium, but was one of his
commercial convenience stores. After careful review of the
record, we agree with petitioner that the property the parties
valued at $247,000 is not a condominium unit and should be
characterized as commercial investment property.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011