Thank you for your question. Please permit me to assist you with your concerns.To answer your questions directly, a temporary ruling plays a minimal role on the final determination. While typically the ruling is considered advisory, it is not binding which means that if either party is able to find additional information that would tilt the facts in their direction even after a temporary ruling, the courts are free to change their minds and subsequently reverse the ruling.His point that he makes more money is somewhat irrelevant--since this is California where assets are communal in nature, the courts will consider his income as marital anyway. What it can play toward is the concept of 'utility', or rather the efficiency of the premises--if one party can show that they are are more capable or able to utilize the property, then the courts do tend to favor them in their evaluation. The one factor that you may not have considered is the special utility of the premises--that is, arguing to the courts that while your potential business is inherently tied to the property and his isn't, you would have a harder hardship should you end up losing the property.Good luck.
do you think that the temporary maintenance issues are a problem for me?
I have been living in the house while he comes and goes for his business but he is putting the weight on me for letting it go even though it was always his responsibility.
He claims that because he isn't living in the house his business and
the maintenance has suffered.
What can i reply to that?
Thank you for your follow-up, Dawn. You are most welcome!The maintenance is technically an issue for you both, since neither of you are adequately maintaining the premises. If you can provide evidence from past payments that the obligation is his rather than yours, it becomes his issue more than yours. The fact that he does not reside there is a bogus argument--since he owns the property he must maintain it regardless of whether or not he is physically present or not. If you both did not split the bills when he moved out, his legal obligations remain as before, so his claim to you is simply to bully you into worrying over issues that are not directly related to your ownership rights.Good luck.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).