Abby L. King v. Thomas E. King
66 A.3d 593
Me.2013Background
- Abby L. King filed for divorce from Thomas E. King in October 2010; an automatic injunction barred transfers of marital or both parties’ property absent consent or court permission.
- Thomas transferred assets during the divorce—including his stock, an IRA, and a Mustang—to his daughter and former girlfriend, despite the injunction, totaling about $120,000–$140,000 in value.
- Thomas was convicted of possession of child pornography prior to the divorce; the offenses involved recording his stepdaughter and daughter, who are Abby’s child and Thomas’s child with a former girlfriend.
- The district court awarded Abby a limited set of marital assets and Thomas’s nonmarital camp lot as reimbursement; most transferred assets remained outside Abby’s reach.
- Abby challenged the minor settlement process and asset transfers, noting possible lack of clarity about the Superior Court’s approval and whether the injunction’s effect was considered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the judgment must address child support | King contends child support must be included or explained. | King asserts the court could decide child support on remand; (implicit) the judgment already resolved other issues. | The court must include a provision for child support or explain why not. |
| Whether constructive remedies for financial misconduct were adequate | King seeks constructive trust or recovery of misappropriated assets. | King argues remedies should be limited by third-party holdings and lack of jurisdiction. | Remand for reevaluation of remedies, including possible constructive trust or other disposition. |
| Whether the injunction violation supports sanctions separate from property division | King argues sanctions are warranted to rectify the injunction breach and compensate Abby. | King maintains sanctions were limited by the court’s structural constraints on third-party assets. | Remand to consider sanctions consistent with the violation and Dostanko guidance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dostanko v. Dostanko, 2013 ME 47 (Me. 2013) (court may impose contempt sanctions equal to losses from willful order violations)
- Lewin v. Skehan, 2012 ME 31 (Me. 2012) (jurisdiction to modify child support limited to retroactive dates and proper findings)
- Merrill v. Merrill, 449 A.2d 1120 (Me. 1982) (property division and support considerations in divorce)
- Hebert v. Hebert, 475 A.2d 422 (Me. 1984) (income imputation and asset consideration in support awards)
- Howard v. Howard, 2010 ME 83 (Me. 2010) (third-party property claims require separate action for constructive interests)
- Stanley v. Hancock Cnty. Comm’rs, 2004 ME 157 (Me. 2004) (judge may comment on unraised but important issues for case management)