Opinion ID: 2353046
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Gift to Alan for the Purchase of Real Property

Text: [¶ 20] Rhonda argues that the court erred by determining that the $50,000 in equity given to Alan by his parents toward the purchase of the Heather Road property was a gift to Alan alone and, therefore, nonmarital property. Pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 953(3) (2006), [a]ll property acquired by either spouse subsequent to the marriage . . . is presumed to be marital property. That presumption, however, can be overcome by showing that the [p]roperty [was] acquired by gift, bequest, devise or descent. 19-A M.R.S. § 953(2)(A) (2006). The determination of whether the $50,000 that Alan did not pay toward the purchase of the home from his parents was a gift, pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 953(2)(A), is a question of fact that we review for clear error. See Spooner v. Spooner, 2004 ME 69, ¶ 7, 850 A.2d 354, 358. [¶ 21] At trial, there was conflicting evidence as to the intention of Alan's father in having Alan pay only $150,000 toward the $200,000 purchase price of the Heather Road property, including several notations on Alan's loan application that the $50,000 down payment is a gift of equity. The court found that the property was a gift to Alan alone, as reflected in the mortgage documents, and that it therefore, remained Alan's nonmarital property. The court's finding that Alan overcame the presumption that the $50,000 had become marital property is supported by the evidence. See Spooner, 2004 ME 69, ¶ 7, 850 A.2d at 358.