The opinion of the court was delivered by: Raye, P.J.
Marriage of Haqq-Hall and Hall CA3
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
Husband Timothy H. Hall appeals from an order wherein the trial court found real property, purchased by wife Evelyn J. Haqq-Hall during the parties' marriage, was her separate property. Consequently, the court ruled that any money received through refinancing the property was Evelyn's separate property. We shall affirm the court's order for the reasons discussed below.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On appeal, Timothy has elected to designate only a clerk's transcript. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.121.) Thus, the record does not include a reporter's transcript of the hearing in this matter. This is referred to as a "judgment roll" appeal. (Allen v. Toten (1985) 172 Cal.App.3d 1079, 1082-1083 (Allen); Krueger v. Bank of America (1983) 145 Cal.App.3d 204, 207.)
The limited record we have been provided establishes the following: Injured in 1986 while working as a brakeman for the United States Navy, Timothy received monthly worker's compensation benefits through the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA; 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.) and disability benefits from the Veteran's Administration (VA).
Timothy and Evelyn were married in August 1998. In May 1999 Timothy was sentenced to prison for a felony conviction. While Timothy was incarcerated, Evelyn received from the Secretary of Labor a percentage of Timothy's FECA benefits pursuant to section 8148(b)(3) of title 15 of the United States Code.
In January 2000, while Timothy was in prison, Evelyn bought a house. Evelyn made the down payment on the house with a monetary gift from her parents. Title to the house was recorded as Evelyn's sole and separate property. The following month, Timothy executed a grant deed, transferring any and all of his interest in the house to Evelyn. Mortgage payments on the house were then made with a combination of Evelyn's own disability payments and the money she was receiving as FECA benefits from the Secretary of Labor.
In December 2006 Timothy was released from prison. Evelyn served defendant with a petition for dissolution on March 2, 2007, alleging the date of separation to be May 7, 1999.*fn1 Timothy responded, alleging the date of separation to be March 9, 2007.
A status only judgment was entered on August 16, 2007, reserving determination on the date of separation, spousal support, and the division of community property. The court subsequently determined the date of separation to be March 9, 2007, reserving the issue of property division for a later hearing.
Prior to trial, Timothy and Evelyn each filed trial briefs identifying the numerous issues to be litigated. Supplemental briefs were then filed on the sole issue of whether the community had an interest in the real property purchased by Evelyn during Timothy's incarceration. Timothy argued the mortgage payments on the house were made with community property, including the money paid to Evelyn by the Secretary of Labor during the period of Timothy's incarceration. Thus, he argued, he was entitled to 50 percent ...