## Facts

- Phillip Levine and Estelle Levine, both previously widowed with adult children, married on January 1, 1974.
- In April 1975, during the marriage, they purchased a residence in Los Angeles and took title as joint tenants.
- Phillip died on November 26, 1977; his will named his attorney and his son, Murray Levine, as co-executors.
- Phillip’s attorney testified Phillip wanted the home treated as community property while held in joint tenancy “for convenience,” so Phillip could leave his half to his children while also avoiding probate and limiting Estelle’s ability to leave “her half” to her children if she died first.
- The attorney testified Phillip said an agreement with Estelle existed to treat the home as community property despite joint-tenancy title.
- Estelle testified she never agreed to treat the home as community property and believed she would take full title by survivorship.
- Murray testified he believed he and his sister would inherit Phillip’s interest in the home.

## Issues

1. Whether a residence acquired during marriage and deeded to spouses as joint tenants may be treated as community property at death based on one spouse’s intent and extrinsic testimony, despite the deed.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported the probate court’s finding that the spouses lacked a mutual agreement or understanding to hold the residence as community property rather than joint tenancy.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the probate court’s order determining the residence was joint-tenancy property.
- The court held Murray failed to prove a mutual agreement or understanding between Phillip and Estelle to recharacterize the joint-tenancy title as community property.
- The court upheld the probate court’s finding that Phillip’s asserted community-property intent was not communicated to Estelle and did not alter the form of title.
- As surviving joint tenant, Estelle took full title by right of survivorship, leaving no devisable half interest in the residence for Phillip’s estate.

## Legal Principles

- A deed taking title in joint tenancy is strong evidence of the parties’ intended ownership form and controls unless overcome by proof of a contrary agreement or understanding.
- Spouses may change the character of marital property by agreement, but recharacterizing joint-tenancy property as community property requires mutual assent; a unilateral, undisclosed intention is insufficient.
- The party seeking to contradict the form of title bears the burden of proving a mutual agreement or conduct establishing a different property character.
- On appeal, the existence of an agreement is treated as a factual question; credibility determinations and supported findings of the trial court are not reweighed when supported by substantial evidence.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the joint-tenancy deed because the evidence did not establish a mutually agreed recharacterization of the property as community property; the surviving spouse therefore received the home by survivorship, and the estate had no transferable half interest.


Estate of Levine, 125 Cal. App. 3d 701 (Ct. App. 1981)