## Facts

- During marriage, William E. Dargie executed and delivered a deed (Oct. 20, 1910) conveying Oakland real property to Etta I. Patterson as a gift.
- The conveyed land was community property acquired during the marriage.
- Mrs. Dargie did not know of, and did not consent to, the conveyance.
- William E. Dargie died on Feb. 10, 1911.
- After his death, Mrs. Dargie sued in equity to invalidate the conveyance and restore her community property rights.
- Patterson contended the deed transferred full title and that any relief for the widow lay against the husband’s estate rather than against the grantee.

## Issues

1. Whether a husband’s gratuitous inter vivos conveyance of community real property without the wife’s knowledge or consent is wholly void, or instead valid as to the husband’s one-half and voidable only as to the wife’s one-half.
2. Whether the surviving wife may recover her one-half interest in the specific property from the grantee, rather than being limited to a claim for value against the husband’s estate.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of California reversed the trial court’s judgment to the extent it declared the deed void as to the entire property.
- The court held the deed was effective to transfer the husband’s one-half community interest but was voidable as to the wife’s one-half interest.
- The court rejected the argument that the wife’s remedy was confined to reimbursement from the husband’s estate.
- The court directed entry of judgment declaring Mrs. Dargie owner of an undivided one-half interest and Patterson owner of an undivided one-half interest.

## Legal Principles

- A spouse’s community property interest is a present, vested one-half interest that cannot be divested by the other spouse’s unilateral gratuitous transfer.
- A managing spouse’s power to deal with community property does not include the power to make gifts that defeat the other spouse’s one-half interest.
- An unauthorized gift of community real property is not void in toto; it is valid as to the donor spouse’s one-half and voidable as to the nonconsenting spouse’s one-half.
- After the donor spouse’s death, the surviving spouse may assert her one-half interest directly against the donee-grantee and recover an undivided one-half interest in the property.

## Conclusion

The court limited the effect of an unauthorized inter vivos gift of community real property by treating it as transferring only the husband’s one-half interest and permitting the nonconsenting surviving wife to reclaim her undivided one-half interest from the grantee, resulting in tenancy in common between the widow and the donee.


Dargie v. Patterson, 176 Cal. 714, 169 P. 360 (Cal. 1917)