Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Defiant
"If the wife dies, it belongs to the husband 100 percent, including the right to determine who goes in there."

Are you speaking for your state, or the state of California? And if the latter, are you an attorney? I ask because some California attorneys on FNC insisted otherwise--that the house is not in fact owned by Scott until this case is decided one way or the other. If he is found guilty, they say, the house will go to Laci's heirs, probably her parents.

171 posted on 05/31/2003 10:59:50 AM PDT by MizSterious (Support whirled peas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]


To: MizSterious
I ask because some California attorneys on FNC insisted otherwise--that the house is not in fact owned by Scott until this case is decided one way or the other. If he is found guilty, they say, the house will go to Laci's heirs, probably her parents.

Exactly.

And the Rochas attorneys contend that because there is no death certificate, the Rochas have just as much right in that house as do the Petersons, regardless of their POA; Scott CANNOT benefit from a crime he committed.

174 posted on 05/31/2003 11:02:42 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]

To: MizSterious
I am a California attorney, but not a probate attorney. Most couples own their house jointly, which means that upon the death of a spouse, the other owns the house as their sole property. It does not go through probate.

There may be a rule that property that goes through probate cannot be inherited by the murderer, I don't know. I know there is a law that prevents murderers from receiving the life insurance. However, if there was a law that applied to inheritance, it would give a right to the next in line of inheritance to object to Scott's inheriting the probated property, such as the personal effects that belonged to both of them. The probate court would decide the issue, holding the matter in abeyance until the criminal trial was over, and then issue a ruling. Only THEN would someone other than Scott have a right to collect those items.

If Geragos wants to be a jerk, he can go after the Rochas for return of everything they took, and he should be able to get a court to issue an order that they do so. He ought also to consider filing a claim for damages against the police who let it happen in front of them. They failed to fulfill their duty to protect the private property of a citizen who has not yet been convicted of a crime.

380 posted on 05/31/2003 4:33:22 PM PDT by Defiant (Bush as philosopher: "I-raq, therefore I-ran.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson