Why are spouses sued under community property obligation?

Why are spouses sued under community property obligation?

As most creditors’ rights lawyers are aware, spouses are typically sued under the community property obligation in order to assist in the collection of a debt against the spouse. Although the spouse is not directly liable to the creditor, he or she is sued to facilitate enforcement of the judgment.

Can a spouse be added to a community property judgment?

The appellate court reversed the amended judgment, stating in part, “Although community property is liable for the debt incurred by either spouse during marriage . . . it does not follow that a wife can be added to a judgment rendered against her husband in an action in which she was not named and had no opportunity to defend.”

Why was a spouse named in a community property case?

Creditors have previously reasoned that the Oyakawa case impliedly authorized the naming of a community property spouse solely to facilitate the enforcement of a judgment against the community property. Therefore, the landlord named the spouse in the complaint and gave her an opportunity to defend.

What happens in a marriage in community of property?

One of the most devastating consequences of a marriage in community of property is that when one spouse becomes insolvent (cannot pay his/her debts), both spouses will be declared insolvent, because there is one communal estate. If there is a court order against either one of the spouses, the communal estate can be lost.

Where can a spouse sign a community property agreement?

Community Property States. The community property states are Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. (In Alaska, spouses can sign an agreement making their assets community property, but few people choose to do this.) Debts.

As most creditors’ rights lawyers are aware, spouses are typically sued under the community property obligation in order to assist in the collection of a debt against the spouse. Although the spouse is not directly liable to the creditor, he or she is sued to facilitate enforcement of the judgment.

The appellate court reversed the amended judgment, stating in part, “Although community property is liable for the debt incurred by either spouse during marriage . . . it does not follow that a wife can be added to a judgment rendered against her husband in an action in which she was not named and had no opportunity to defend.”

Creditors have previously reasoned that the Oyakawa case impliedly authorized the naming of a community property spouse solely to facilitate the enforcement of a judgment against the community property. Therefore, the landlord named the spouse in the complaint and gave her an opportunity to defend.