 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Classified Postings in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Marriage of Prasad4/24/2002
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Appellants Aditya Prasad (Husband), his father Saryu Prasad (Father), and his mother Savitri Prasad (Mother) appeal from a judgment of dissolution of the marriage of Husband and respondent Raj Prasad (Wife). Husband and his parents contend there is insufficient evidence to support the family law court's findings that: (1) Husband's family members made no loans to the community; (2) Husband breached his fiduciary duty to Wife; (3) the down payment for Husband and Wife's residence came from Husband's funds or a gift from his parents; (4) the entire amount of the tax liability created by Husband's decision to file a separate tax return should be assigned to Husband; and (5) income should be imputed to Husband for tax preparation work. We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The Marriage
Husband's family lives in the United States and Wife's family lives in India . On June 29, 1985, three weeks after Wife graduated from college in India, Husband and Wife were married in India by an arranged marriage. They immediately took up residence in the United States to live with Husband's family. At the time Husband and Wife were married, Husband worked as a Principal Electrical Engineering Assistant for the County of Los Angeles earning $2,630 per month. Husband's salary gradually increased to $5,100 per month. The couple has three minor children. Wife took care of the children and the home.
In the fall of 1986, Husband and Wife purchased a home for $151,000. Title was taken in the names of Husband, Wife, Father, and Mother, as joint tenants. The escrow records show receipt of a cashier's check for $29,553 from Husband and Mother. On March 24, 1992, Husband's parents signed and delivered a quitclaim deed to the house to Husband and Wife as grantees.
Husband bought at least $30,000 of stock during the course of the marriage. He told Wife about some of the stock purchases. He also set up three trust accounts, one for each child, containing approximately $30,000 each. Husband claimed he did not remember where the accounts were located and no longer received account statements. Husband kept the family's investment documents in a locked filing cabinet or at his parents' house. Several savings bonds in the children's names were kept in the filing cabinet.
Husband and Wife had a joint checking account. Each month, Husband gave Wife a checkbook from which to pay utilities and other bills. He retrieved the checkbook from her after each set of bills had been paid. Wife noted the balance stated in the checkbook. Wife did not manage or control the stock portfolio or the mortgage payments. However, the mortgage payments were made from the joint account. Husband and Wife did not own a car, but Husband was allowed to borrow one of his parents' six cars. Wife was allowed to borrow a car from her in-laws to drive the children to and from school. During the marriage, Wife never went to a grocery store or shopping mall without the company of Husband or his family members. Husband had at least two bank accounts of which Wife was unaware, including one he shared with his parents.
In October 1992, Husband was terminated from his job with the County. Husband filed a wrongful termination action requesting back pay and reinstatement. He has not worked since his termination. Wife asked Husband the sourc
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 California Classifieds
Classified Postings
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Classified Postings in your area.
|
|