Lilmod, Rav Moshe’s teshuva is in Iggrot Moshe Even HaEzer vol. 1. 114. Rav Ovadia disagrees (Yabia Omer vol. 3, Even HaEzer 21). So it would turn on who is muchzak (has possession ofthe asset) as in such a case we leave it with him or her. The Supreme Rabbinical Court (file 835204/1 – available on-line) in fact ruled that the husband is muchzak in the ketuba so here she would lose it. What an American bet din would do is another question as it is a machloket (see’Shiur #12: “Muchzakut” With Regard to the Ketuba Payment” by Rav Yair Kahn Translated by David Silverberg available on-line) However, the rabbinical courts here have accepted the Community Property Law as halachically binding as minhag hamedina. Thus they are both muchzak in matrimonial property. An interesting situation would be if she grabs the value ofthe ketuba before leaving as she might then be considered the muchzeket (see
????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???? – available on-line).
FuturePOTUS, to my understanding OO is not condoning acts but looking the other way. Is this different than looking the other way regarding people who commit financial crimes (also a toeva – Devarim 25:13).