Marriage of Dadashian

Summary

In 2008, the couple withdrew $130,000–$150,000 from a HELOC and sent it to Laleh's brother in Iran for investment. Separately, Ramin's roughly $170,000 inheritance was also transferred to the brother's control. At trial, neither asset was accounted for. The trial court declined to shift the burden to Laleh under Margulis, reasoning that she played only a "minor role" in managing the Iran assets and that the HELOC had been forgiven by the lender. The Court of Appeal reversed. It held that Margulis burden-shifting applies when one spouse exclusively controls the relationship with a third-party money manager (here, Laleh's brother), even though the spouse is not personally managing the day-to-day investments. The court further extended Margulis to cover separate property: a spouse who manages her partner's separate property and controls access to its records bears the same fiduciary accounting duty as for community property. On the evidence, Ramin easily met the low prima facie threshold. He presented his own testimony, his friend's corroborating testimony about the Tehran property purchase, and two of Laleh's own pretrial disclosures listing the Iranian real estate and the $150,000 HELOC placement. Once he made that showing, Laleh was required to prove proper disposition or lesser value; her assertions that the money was "gone" or that she "didn't know" were insufficient. The judgment was reversed and remanded for retrial.

What it means for the financial analysis

When the opposing party has prepared preliminary disclosures or discovery responses listing or valuing assets, those documents often anchor your prima facie case on existence and value at separation. They're especially powerful if the party later disavows them.

Also available on CourtListener.