If you only remember one point about how to file for divorce in California, remember this: At least one spouse must have been a California resident for 6 months, and a county resident for 3 months, before filing. Grounds: No-fault only: irreconcilable differences or permanent legal incapacity to make decisions. Property: community property. California is a community-property state. Community assets and debts acquired during marriage are generally divided under community-property principles (often equally); separate property is confirmed to the owning spouse when properly traced. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Cal. Fam. Code §§ 2310 to 2348, 2550 to 2660. Waiting period: A judgment of dissolution generally cannot become final until 6 months after service of the petition and summons (Fam. Code § 2339). File in Superior Court (Family Division) in the county of residence of either party.
Property division: community property
California is a community-property state. Community assets and debts acquired during marriage are generally divided under community-property principles (often equally); separate property is confirmed to the owning spouse when properly traced.
Retirement accounts, closely held businesses, and marital homes often need valuations and Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs). Do not assume an informal split of bank accounts finishes the case.
Walking through California facts
Use this walkthrough to see which California authority does the work at each step.
A spouse wants to file for divorce in California and is unsure about residency, grounds, and property.
- Confirm residency: At least one spouse must have been a California resident for 6 months, and a county resident for 3 months, before filing.
- Plead grounds California recognizes: No-fault only: irreconcilable differences or permanent legal incapacity to make decisions.
- Expect property division under community property: California is a community-property state. Community assets and debts acquired during marriage are generally divided under community-property principles (often equally); separate property is confirmed to the owning spouse when properly traced.
- Plan the timeline: A judgment of dissolution generally cannot become final until 6 months after service of the petition and summons (Fam. Code § 2339). A petition for dissolution starts the case; FL-100 cover sheets and disclosures (FL-140 series) follow. Temporary orders use Requests for Order. Many counties require mediation for custody and offer settlement conferences for property. Marital status usually terminates only after the six-month waiting period even if financial issues remain bifurcated.
California courts.selfhelp and local family law facilitators assist with forms; community-property tracing, QDROs, and business valuations typically need counsel.
Waiting periods and timelines
A judgment of dissolution generally cannot become final until 6 months after service of the petition and summons (Fam. Code § 2339).
The typical California divorce process
A petition for dissolution starts the case; FL-100 cover sheets and disclosures (FL-140 series) follow. Temporary orders use Requests for Order. Many counties require mediation for custody and offer settlement conferences for property. Marital status usually terminates only after the six-month waiting period even if financial issues remain bifurcated.
Self-help and when to hire counsel
California courts.selfhelp and local family law facilitators assist with forms; community-property tracing, QDROs, and business valuations typically need counsel.
Related California guides
- Child custody and parenting time in California
- Security deposit return in California
- DUI penalties in California
Case law: divorce in California
ZOLA v. HILL, Appellant, v. JACK C. HILL, Respondent
ZOLA v. HILL, Appellant, v. JACK C. HILL, Respondent, 23 Cal. 2d 82 (1943)
GIBSON, C. J. This action was brought by a divorced wife to recover payments under a property settlement agreement executed on August 14, 1928, while the parties thereto were still husband and wife, but living separate and apart. The trial court found and concluded that the execution and delivery of the agreement “was at the time and date conditioned upon and i…
Practitioners open ZOLA v. HILL, Appellant, v. JACK C. HILL, Respondent when California divorce turns on the distinction in this sentence: "GIBSON, C. J. This action was brought by a divorced wife to recover payments under a property settlement agreement executed on August 14, 1928, while the parties thereto were still husband and wife, but living separate and apart." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
In Re the Marriage of MARILYN and ZELIG MODNICK. MARILYN MODNICK, Appellant, v. ZELIG MODNICK, Respondent
…aud. She also claimed, as a separate basis for vacating the divorce decree, that she and Zelig had reconciled from September of 1975 to September of 1978. 4 Supporting and opposing declarations were filed by the parties. Zelig argued, inter alia, that the doctrine of laches barred Marilyn from obtaining relief. *904 Following a hearing on November 26, 1980, the trial court deni…
California opinions such as In Re the Marriage of MARILYN and ZELIG MODNICK. MARILYN MODNICK, Appellant, v. ZELIG MODNICK, Respondent are cited where divorce is disputed. The court stated: "She also claimed, as a separate basis for vacating the divorce decree, that she and Zelig had reconciled from September of 1975 to September of 1978. 4 Supporting and opposing declarations were filed by the parties." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re the Marriage of NORMA and PAUL ATTLEY McKIM. NORMA McKIM, Appellant, v. PAUL ATTLEY McKIM, Respondent
…October 21, 1968, the wife filed her verified complaint for divorce on the ground of extreme cruelty. On November 11, 1968, the parties stipulated that the wife “may proceed to procure a default divorce.” The stipulation provided for a division of property, the wife waived alimony, and the husband agreed to pay all community obligations. The husband’s default was entered in Dec…
In Re the Marriage of NORMA and PAUL ATTLEY McKIM. NORMA McKIM, Appellant, v. PAUL ATTLEY McKIM, Respondent is worth reading on California divorce because the court put the point in its own words: "October 21, 1968, the wife filed her verified complaint for divorce on the ground of extreme cruelty. On November 11, 1968, the parties stipulated that the wife “may proceed to procure a default divorce." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
LAWRENCE BORG, Respondent, v. ELSE BORG, Appellant
LAWRENCE BORG, Respondent, v. ELSE BORG, Appellant, 25 Cal. App. 2d 25 (1938)
…en Harder in Germany. The couple soon separated and later a divorce proceeding was instituted in the courts of Germany. On December 24, 1930, Else Borg, having been informed by letter that her German divorce decree would be entered before that date, married Lawrence Borg at San Jose in this state. On April 25, 1933, she sued Lawrence Borg for divorce on the grounds of extreme c…
On divorce, LAWRENCE BORG, Respondent, v. ELSE BORG, Appellant speaks to the California dispute in this passage: "Harder in Germany. The couple soon separated and later a divorce proceeding was instituted in the courts of Germany." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
ELLA E. HARROLD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ELLSWORTH HARROLD, Defendant and Appellant — Teaynoe, J., concurring
…ion that the trial court properly entered a final decree of divorce, but am of the opinion that in reaching this result we should overrule Webster v. Webster, 216 Cal. 485, 487 [14 P.2d 522], In the Webster case, as in the present one, the appeal was only from the part of the interlocutory decree dividing the community property. The majority opinion distinguishes the Webster ca…
California opinions such as ELLA E. HARROLD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ELLSWORTH HARROLD, Defendant and Appellant — Teaynoe, J., concurring are cited where divorce is disputed. The court stated: "Webster v. Webster, 216 Cal. 485, 487 [14 P.2d 522], In the Webster case, as in the present one, the appeal was only from the part of the interlocutory decree dividing the community property." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re the Marriage of FARIMA and KAMBIZ NOGHREY. FARIMA NOGHREY, Respondent, v. KAMBIZ NOGHREY, Appellant
…married for seven and one-half months when Farima filed for divorce. Her petition alleged the existence of an antenuptial agreement setting forth the property rights of the parties. The issue of the existence and validity of the agreement was bifurcated from the dissolution proceeding and heard first. Frances and Charles Kandel had known Farima for several years prior to her ma…
In Re the Marriage of FARIMA and KAMBIZ NOGHREY. FARIMA NOGHREY, Respondent, v. KAMBIZ NOGHREY, Appellant is worth reading on California divorce because the court put the point in its own words: "Farima filed for divorce. Her petition alleged the existence of an antenuptial agreement setting forth the property rights of the parties. The issue of the existence and validity of the agreement was bifurcated from the dissolution proceeding and heard first." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In Re the Marriage of JUDITH A. and ATTWOOD F. THORNTON. JUDITH A. THORNTON, Appellant, v. ATTWOOD F. THORNTON
…e in addition to the 1972 Oldsmobile. I. Should the Florida divorce be accorded full faith and credit by the California court. Wife contends the court could not have granted husband’s motion to quash by recognition of the Florida divorce, because it is invalid. The invalidity argued is based on a lack of proper notice, and that husband was not a resident of Florida. In the cour…
On divorce, In Re the Marriage of JUDITH A. and ATTWOOD F. THORNTON. JUDITH A. THORNTON, Appellant, v. ATTWOOD F. THORNTON speaks to the California dispute in this passage: "Oldsmobile. I. Should the Florida divorce be accorded full faith and credit by the California court. Wife contends the court could not have granted husband’s motion to quash by recognition of the Florida divorce, because it is invalid." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
KATIE RADICH, Respondent, v. MARTIN RADICH, Appellant
KATIE RADICH, Respondent, v. MARTIN RADICH, Appellant, 64 Cal. App. 605 (1923)
…DON, P. J. Plaintiff was granted an interlocutory decree of divorce from the defendant upon the ground of his extreme cruelty and no objection is made by the appellant to the findings upon this issue. The only question raised upon the appeal is the correctness of the trial court’s conclusions of law regarding certain real property. The court made a finding that said real proper…
Practitioners open KATIE RADICH, Respondent, v. MARTIN RADICH, Appellant when California divorce turns on the distinction in this sentence: "DON, P. J. Plaintiff was granted an interlocutory decree of divorce from the defendant upon the ground of his extreme cruelty and no objection is made by the appellant to the findings upon this issue." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Key takeaways
- Residency: At least one spouse must have been a California resident for 6 months, and a county resident for 3 months, before filing.
- Grounds: No-fault only: irreconcilable differences or permanent legal incapacity to make decisions.
- Property: community property — California is a community-property state.
- Waiting period: A judgment of dissolution generally cannot become final until 6 months after service of the petition and summons (Fam. Code § 2339).
- Filing forum: Superior Court (Family Division) in the county of residence of either party.
- Primary authority: Cal. Fam. Code §§ 2310 to 2348, 2550 to 2660.
Residency and where to file
At least one spouse must have been a California resident for 6 months, and a county resident for 3 months, before filing. File in the Superior Court (Family Division) in the county of residence of either party. Wrong venue or missing residency can delay service, temporary orders, and the final decree — confirm the county clerk’s checklist before you pay the filing fee.
Grounds for divorce in California
No-fault only: irreconcilable differences or permanent legal incapacity to make decisions.
Even in no-fault states, fault allegations can still affect temporary support, attorney’s fees, or credibility disputes. Read the live statute text on LawDiver and pair it with the LawDiver search rail scoped to California.
Frequently asked questions
How long do I have to live in California before filing for divorce?
At least one spouse must have been a California resident for 6 months, and a county resident for 3 months, before filing.
Is California a community-property state?
California follows community property. California is a community-property state. Community assets and debts acquired during marriage are generally divided under community-property principles (often equally); separate property is confirmed to the owning spouse when properly traced.
Do I need a lawyer to get divorced in California?
California courts.selfhelp and local family law facilitators assist with forms; community-property tracing, QDROs, and business valuations typically need counsel.
What happens to child custody in a California divorce?
Custody and parenting time are decided under California’s best-interests framework. See child custody and parenting time in California.
This guide covers California law as of 2026. Statutes and local rules change — verify the live text on LawDiver before filing.