- 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