Here, law. It’s clearly separate property. Appellant insisted

Here, William acquired
the property during the years 1885 to 1899 and 1906 to 1919. This property
was controlled by Montana State law. It’s clearly separate property.

Appellant insisted that according to the Cal. Civ. Code § 164, the property as a matter of law would convert
from separate property to community property. Respondent asserted that William clearly declared that the property was his separate
property and wanted to dispose his separate property thorough the will. Furthermore,
Respondent issued
the constitutionality of the law. The Court held that if the separate property
converted to community property by simply bringing from common law state into
community law state, then it would impair William’s vested right as to the
property.