## Facts

- Virgil George Winn and Alfreda E. Winn married on June 3, 1972.
- In November 1972, they purchased a house for $27,346.14.
- Virgil paid $200 earnest money and a $3,146 down payment from his separate funds.
- Title to the house was taken in both spouses’ names.
- The remaining $24,000 was financed by a loan secured by a deed of trust; both spouses signed the note and deed of trust.
- All loan payments during and after the marriage were made from Virgil’s separate funds.
- The parties separated in early 1977; Alfreda moved out and Virgil remained in exclusive possession.
- In the divorce proceedings, the trial court treated the home as community property, ordered reimbursement to Virgil for separate-fund payments, and required Virgil to pay Alfreda rent for his exclusive post-separation occupancy (with appropriate offsets).

## Issues

1. Whether a residence acquired during marriage, titled in both spouses’ names, and financed by a jointly signed loan is community property when the down payment and all loan payments come from one spouse’s separate funds.
2. Whether the spouse who remains in exclusive post-separation possession of a community residence owes rent to the other spouse for that spouse’s one-half interest, despite the occupying spouse’s separate-fund payment of mortgage obligations.

## Decision

- The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the judgment.
- The residence was properly classified as community property.
- Virgil was entitled to reimbursement for separate funds contributed to acquire and service debt on the community asset.
- The rental charge for Virgil’s exclusive post-separation occupancy was upheld, subject to credits/offsets for payments and expenses benefiting the property.

## Legal Principles

- Property acquired during marriage is presumed to be community property; the spouse claiming separate character bears the burden to rebut that presumption.
- Taking title in both spouses’ names and incurring joint liability on purchase financing supports community characterization of property acquired during marriage.
- Paying purchase or mortgage obligations with separate funds, without more, does not transmute jointly titled marital property from community to separate property.
- Separate contributions to a community asset generally support a right to equitable reimbursement rather than reclassification of the asset.
- A spouse’s exclusive use of a community residence after separation may justify a rental offset in favor of the non-occupying spouse, with credits for mortgage payments, taxes, and necessary maintenance paid by the occupying spouse.

## Conclusion

The court held that a home acquired during marriage and titled in both spouses’ names remained community property even though one spouse paid the down payment and all mortgage payments from separate funds; the proper remedies were reimbursement for separate contributions and a rental offset for exclusive post-separation possession.


Winn v. Winn, 673 P.2d 411 (Idaho 1983)