## Facts

- In 1973, Petra Tejeda and Pablo Tejeda participated in a marriage ceremony; unknown to Petra, Pablo was then married to Margarita Rivera Tejeda.
- Pablo petitioned to dissolve his marriage to Margarita in 1975; a dissolution judgment was entered in 1976.
- In 1988, Petra and Pablo participated in a second церemony in Mexico without civil formalities.
- The relationship lasted over 30 years and produced five children.
- Beginning in 1994, Petra acquired multiple parcels of real property, taking title in her name (sometimes with relatives), not in Pablo’s name.
- In 2006, Pablo filed for dissolution; Petra later sought nullity based on the 1973 bigamy and argued that the real property titled in her name was her separate property.
- The evidence showed Petra believed in good faith that the marriage was valid until 2006, when she learned of Pablo’s prior marriage.

## Issues

1. Whether, after a marriage is declared void for bigamy, Family Code § 2251 requires property acquired during the union that would have been community or quasi-community property to be treated as quasi-marital property and divided as community property.
2. Whether property titled solely in the putative spouse’s name can nonetheless be characterized as quasi-marital property subject to equal division under § 2251.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment.
- The trial court properly declared Petra a putative spouse based on her good-faith belief in the marriage’s validity.
- Under the mandatory text of Family Code § 2251, property acquired during the union that would have been community or quasi-community property in a valid marriage is quasi-marital property.
- The trial court correctly treated the real property Petra acquired during the union, despite being titled in her name, as quasi-marital property and divided it under community property rules.

## Legal Principles

- A marriage that is void or voidable may be treated as a putative marriage for property division purposes if one or both parties held a good-faith belief in its validity.
- Family Code § 2251 is mandatory: once good-faith belief is found, the court must (1) declare putative spouse status and (2) divide qualifying property acquired during the union as quasi-marital property under Division 7 community property rules.
- Quasi-marital property includes property acquired during the union that would have been community or quasi-community property if the marriage had been valid; formal record title does not control this characterization.
- The putative spouse doctrine is remedial and aims to prevent unfairness to an innocent party who reasonably believed in a valid marriage.

## Conclusion

The court held that once a party is found to be a putative spouse under Family Code § 2251, property acquired during the union that would have been community or quasi-community property in a valid marriage must be treated as quasi-marital property and divided as community property, even if titled solely in the putative spouse’s name.


In re Marriage of Tejeda, 179 Cal. App. 4th 973, 102 Cal. Rptr. 3d 361 (Ct. App. 2009)