Shaw v. Shaw, 290 Ga. 354

Shaw (Wife) and Shaw (Husband) married in 1968 and separated in 2007; divorce action filed in 2009 focusing on equitable distribution.
Trial court equitably distributed Florida unimproved property, and two Morgan Stanley accounts equally, but left 6.67% interests in an apartment complex undisposed.
Husband appealed under a Pilot Project; this Court granted discretionary review of the domestic relations judgment.
Accounts were opened for inheritance funds with names in both spouses, purportedly transforming Husband’s separate property into marital property.
Inherited Florida property was deeded to both spouses as tenants in common, giving each an undivided one-half interest, raising transformation into marital asset.
Apartment complex interests were purchased during marriage with marital funds, creating marital assets; Wife held 6.67% separate to Husband’s claim, but court ultimately treated as marital.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Are the Morgan Stanley accounts marital property?	Husband inherited funds; accounts should remain separate.	Transformed into marital property because owned jointly and held as joint tenants with right of survivorship.	Accounts are marital property.
Was the Florida real property marital property?	Inheritanced property; Wife did not contribute to value; not commingled.	Husband deeded to both as tenants in common; indicates transformation into marital asset.	Property was marital.
Should Husband receive Wife's interest in the apartment complex?	Husband paid $20,000 in legal fees after initiating litigation and seeks Wife’s interest.	Wife remains party in litigation with separate attorney; trial court has broad discretion in equitable division.	Trial court did not abuse discretion; property remains marital.
Was there prejudgment bias when the judge commented on the case?	Judge made prior-to-evidence conclusions suggesting bias.	Comments occurred in bench trial with comprehensive questioning; judge open to later evidence; not improper.	No error; comments permissible in a bench trial.

Lerch v. Lerch, 278 Ga. 885 (Ga. 2005) (transformation of inherited property into marital asset through gifting/titling)
Coe v. Coe, 285 Ga. 863 (Ga. 2009) (nonmarital inheritance may become marital via transmutation)
Miller v. Miller, 288 Ga. 274 (Ga. 2010) (property acquired by gift or inheritance can become marital asset through transmutation)
Stanley v. Stanley, 281 Ga. 672 (Ga. 2007) (trial court with broad discretion in equitable division of marital property)
In the Interest of C. S., 275 Ga. App. 562 (Ga. App. 2005) (judge in bench trial may express opinions on evidence; limited impact on outcome)