In Nace v. Nace, 6 Ariz. App. 348, 354, 432 P.2d 896, 902 (1967), vacated on other grounds in 104 Ariz. 20, 448 P.2d 76 (1968), the husband had a separate property interest in the ownership of a chain of movie theaters. 6 Ariz. App. at 349, 432 P.2d at 897. The separate property increased in value during the marriage. Id. at 349-50, 432 P.2d at 897-98. The husband actively managed the business during the marriage. Id. The trial court determined that the separate property had increased in value both due to the inherent nature of the property and the husband's management skills. Id. The trial court awarded the husband the "lion's share" of the increase in the separate property business because it was due to the husband's efforts, as contrasted with the wife's, after the marriage. Id. at 354, 432 P.2d at 902. The court of appeals rejected this reasoning because the efforts of the husband on behalf of the community were efforts in which the wife was entitled to share. Id. In describing the "all or none" rule in place in Arizona, the Nace court stated that "in the absence of a clear showing that a fair salary for the husband's efforts has been set, Arizona decisions have followed an 'all or none' rule. . . ." Id. The court reversed the allocation of value as to the separate property and awarded the wife substantially more. Id. at 355, 432 P.2d at 903.