Stock Options and RSUs in Divorce: Dividing What Hasn't Vested
This is a subtitle for your new post

QIM Score: 80/100 — published under the house rule: no post goes live unscored.
Routes: Stunning Law · Family Law
The Data Hook
In tech-heavy California, a huge slice of a family's wealth can sit in stock options and RSUs — much of it unvested at separation. Dividing equity comp is one of the trickiest property issues, and the two spouses naturally read the same grant in opposite ways.
His Side — Michael
The employee spouse argues the unvested options and RSUs are compensation for future work he hasn't performed yet — so they should be his separate property, earned after the marriage ended. He's partly right and partly not. The mistake is treating all unvested equity as separate when a portion was clearly granted for marital-era effort.
Her Side — Ava
The non-employee spouse knows those grants were awarded during the marriage, often as a reward for past performance and to retain him — value the family helped create. She wants the community share and fears it vesting quietly into his name post-divorce while she's told it's "future" money. Her mistake is assuming the whole grant is community, or missing the grants entirely in disclosure.
The Law (Both Sides)
California apportions unvested equity with time-rule formulas — chiefly Hug (when a grant rewards past service/hiring) and Nelson (when it rewards future retention) — using fractions based on grant date, vesting date, and the date of separation to split each tranche into community and separate portions. The result is rarely all-or-nothing: most grants divide partly community, partly separate. Full disclosure of every grant, vesting schedule, and account is mandatory.
What to Do
Equity comp is won with the right formula applied grant-by-grant. A free Stunning Law consult runs Hug/Nelson for the employee or non-employee spouse.
Stunning Law — free consult | Michael Benavides, Esq., CA Bar No. 270714 | 707-362-4166 | attorneymichaelbenavides.com
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. Stunning Law is a trade name of the law practice of Michael Benavides, Esq., California State Bar No. 270714. General information only — not legal advice; no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this. His Side is voiced by Michael; Her Side by Ava Benavides — an editorial brand voice, not an attorney. Only Michael Benavides, Esq. is a licensed attorney, and the law stated here is his. Figures cited are as of mid-2026; verify current data. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.





