## Facts

- Before marriage, the wife bought a townhouse in Sharlo Subdivision and financed it with a mortgage; the townhouse remained her separate property.
- During the marriage, the spouses lived in the townhouse as the family home.
- Over the marriage, 31 monthly mortgage payments were made with community funds, consisting of principal and interest.
- After separation and termination of the community, the parties partitioned all community property except a dispute over reimbursement for community mortgage payments on the wife’s separate townhouse.
- The parties agreed the husband was owed reimbursement for one-half of the community funds applied to reduce mortgage principal.
- The husband also sought reimbursement for one-half of the community funds used to pay the interest portion of the note (about $16,350).
- The trial court denied reimbursement for any part of the interest payments, and the husband appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether, upon termination of the community, a spouse is entitled to reimbursement for one-half of community funds used to pay mortgage interest on the other spouse’s separate immovable property when the property served as the family residence.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the judgment for the wife.
- The court held the husband was not entitled to reimbursement for community funds used to pay the interest portion of the mortgage on the wife’s separate townhouse used as the family home.
- The court accepted that principal reductions on the mortgage were reimbursable, but distinguished interest as nonreimbursable in these circumstances.

## Legal Principles

- Louisiana reimbursement rules (Civil Code arts. 2364–2367) treat qualifying community expenditures benefiting a spouse’s separate estate as an interest-free loan measured by the amount or value of property used.
- Community payments reducing the principal balance of a mortgage on a spouse’s separate immovable generally support reimbursement because they preserve or increase the separate estate.
- Mortgage interest paid while the spouses occupy the separate property as the family residence is treated as an ordinary expense of use and enjoyment (similar to housing costs) consumed during the community, not as an advance that warrants reimbursement to the community.
- Reimbursement is aimed at adjusting interspousal claims at termination without converting routine household consumption during the marriage into a reimbursable claim against separate property.

## Conclusion

The court held that, although the community is reimbursed for funds used to reduce the principal of a mortgage on one spouse’s separate home, it is not reimbursed for interest paid on that mortgage when the home served as the family residence during the marriage.


Parker v. Parker, 517 So. 2d 264 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987)