Brian LeClair lives in Tucson, Arizona. In early 2011 he bought a small home for $50,000, $45,000 of which he financed through a mortgage. Later that year, Brian met Monica, and they married within the week. Brian was later to regret his quick decision.

Shortly after they were married, Brian discovered that Monica liked to shop. In fact, she entered the marriage with approximately $5,000 in credit card bills. During their marriage, this pattern persisted, with Monica on average charging $500 per month for clothes and jewelry for herself. Brian and Monica each deposited their earnings in a joint checking account and each paid half of the monthly mortgage payments.

When Brian's father died in 2012, he left Brian 100 shares of stock, valued at $10 per share. Brian, knowing little about investments, asked Monica to handle his stock for him. She did so, and through careful buying and selling, Brian now owns 150 shares of stock, valued at $15 a share. Brian's father also left Brian his mother's wedding ring, which as part of his father's estate was valued at $1,000. A jeweler recently appraised it at $1,500. Finally, his father left him $5,000, which he deposited into his and Monica's joint banking account.

In 2013 Monica stated that she was tired of living in Brian's tiny house and wanted to buy some land so that they could build a new, larger home. Brian was against the purchase both because of the cost and because of the rumors the land was about to be rezoned industrial. Monica went ahead anyway and took out a $20,000 loan from Commercial Savings to purchase the land. Brian did not sign the loan papers. The deed, however, lists them as joint owners. When the rumors proved to be true, the value of the land plummeted to $2,000.

Last week Monica informed Brian that she was tired of being married and that she needed some "space." When Brian got home from work the next day, he found that she was gone. Later that day when he opened the mail, he found a letter from Commercial Savings notifying him that the remaining amount of the loan ($18,000) was due immediately, as Monica had not made any payments in the last year. Also, there was a letter from the credit card company showing Monica's total balance of $12,000. As far as Brian could tell, at least $4,000 was money she had charged before they were married.

Brian has come to your firm because he is thinking of initiating divorce proceedings against Monica. He realizes, however, that Arizona is a community property state and is concerned, first, that he may be liable for what he considers to be Monica's debts and, second, that she may claim some of his property should be categorized as community property, thereby allowing her to take one-half. Your boss wants you to research (1) whether Brian is liable for either the Commercial Savings loan or Monica's credit card bills, (2) which assets would qualify as community assets and hence be available to satisfy a community debt if the court were to find him liable, and (3) which remaining assets Monica might be able to claim belong one-half to her as her share of community property.

The contested assets include the stock valued at $2,250, the house (with a mortgage of $40,000 and a resale value of $60,000), the diamond ring valued at $1,500, the land worth $2,000, and $10,000 in their joint checking account. As to the latter, Brian claims that $5,000 is from his inheritance, $4,000 came from money he earned, and the remaining $1,000 came from Monica's earnings.

In doing your research, you found the following Arizona statutes:

Chapter 25-211 All property acquired by either husband or wife during the marriage, except that which is acquired by gift, devise, or descent, is the community property of the husband and wife. Chapter 25-213 All property . . . of each spouse, owned by such spouse before marriage . . . is the separate property of such spouse. Chapter 25-214C. Either spouse separately may acquire, manage, control or dispose of community property, or bind the community. . . . Chapter 25-215A. The separate property of a spouse shall not be liable for the separate debts or obligations of the other spouse. . . . Chapter 25-215D. [E]ither spouse may contract debts and otherwise act for the benefit of the community. In an action on such a debt or obligation, the spouse shall be sued jointly and the debt or obligation shall be satisfied: first, from the community property, and second, from the separate property of the spouse contracting the debt or obligation.

2. Michael and Bonnie were married. The couple separated, and Michael began living with Donna. Bonnie filed for divorce. A hearing was held to end the marriage, but because Bonnie's attorney sent Michael a notice with the wrong date, a new hearing date was set. In the meantime, Michael and Donna won a $2.2 million jackpot in the Arizona state lottery. At the rescheduled hearing Bonnie claimed an interest in one-half of the winnings. Should the judge award it to her? Note: Arizona is a community property state. Would your answer be different if it was not?

3. In 2013, Massachusetts led the way with alimony reform. Read the following statutory excerpts and then apply them to each situation.

Massachusetts General Laws, ch. 208, 49

(a) General term alimony shall terminate upon the remarriage of the recipient or the death of either spouse.

(b) If the length of the marriage is 20 years or less, general term alimony shall terminate no later than a date certain under the following durational limits:

(1) If the length of the marriage is 5 years or less, general term alimony shall continue for not longer than one-half the number of months of the marriage.

(2) If the length of the marriage is 10 years or less, but more than 5 years, general term alimony shall continue for not longer than 60 per cent of the number of months of the marriage.

(3) If the length of the marriage is 15 years or less, but more than 10 years, general term alimony shall continue for not longer than 70 per cent of the number of months of the marriage.

(4) If the length of the marriage is 20 years or less, but more than 15 years, general term alimony shall continue for not longer than 80 per cent of the number of months of the marriage.

(c) The court may order alimony for an indefinite length of time for marriages for which the length of the marriage was longer than 20 years.

(d) General term alimony shall be suspended, reduced or terminated upon the cohabitation of the recipient spouse when the recipient spouse has maintained a common household with another person for a continuous period of at least 3 months.

(e) Once issued, general term alimony orders shall terminate upon the payor attaining the full retirement age.

a. Brad and Betty divorced after 25 years of marriage. Brad was ordered to pay alimony. Two years later Betty remarries. What happens to Brad's obligation to pay alimony?

b. Jim and Jill were married for four years. What is the maximum length of time Jill can receive alimony?

c. Alice and Robert were married for 30 years. What is the maximum length of time Robert can receive alimony?

4. Mark and Chris Cooley were unable to have children because Chris had undergone a hysterectomy. They decided to enter into a surrogacy arrangement whereby a zygote formed of the gametes of the husband and the wife would be implanted in the uterus of Anna Johnson. Therefore, Mark and Chris were the natural parents of the child, and Anna served as a gestational surrogate. In return for agreeing to act as surrogate, the Cooleys agreed to reimburse Anna for her medical expenses and any loss of wages for time she had to take off from work, both during and after the pregnancy. In return, Anna agreed to relinquish all parental rights to the child. Shortly before she was to give birth, Anna announced that she would not go through with the agreement unless the Cooleys gave her an additional $20,000. The Cooleys responded with a lawsuit asking that they be declared the parents of the unborn child. Evaluate the arguments both for and against having the court rule in favor of the Cooleys.