Allen v. Ciokewicz, 2012 UT App 162

Husband (James N. Ciokewicz) appeals a divorce decree after the court struck his answer and entered default in Wife Christina Allen’s favor.
Husband sought temporary relief including possession of the marital home, temporary support, and disputed the CalPERS retirement funds while proceedings continued.
Wife filed requests to strike the answer and enter default, asserting willful nonparticipation and dilatory tactics by Husband.
The court entered a bifurcated divorce decree due to Husband’s bankruptcy, staying property division pending relief from stay.
The trial court later awarded Wife most of the marital assets and retirement accounts and ordered fees; it also found inadequacies in Husband’s participation and in the evidentiary support for the property division and fee award.
Husband challenges notice, property classification, equitable division, and attorney-fee award; the court affirms in part and remands in part.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether striking the answer and entering default was an abuse of discretion	Husband argues the sanction was excessive given medical illness and travel constraints	Wife contends Husband willfully failed to participate and delayed proceedings	Not an abuse; sanctions upheld and default entered
Whether Husband had constitutionally adequate notice of the property division hearing	Husband asserts lack of notice and inadequate opportunity to appear	Wife contends actual notice and court discretion to manage proceedings	Husband had actual notice; no due-process violation found but remand for detailed findings on property and fees needed
Whether the trial court’s property division was equitable and properly classified	Husband contends failure to categorize marital vs. separate property and deviation from principles	Wife claims distribution reasonable under circumstances	Remanded for proper classification and detailed, equitable distribution under Utah law
Whether the attorney-fee award is supported by the record	Husband argues the basis for fees is inadequate and lacks evidence of need and reasonableness	Wife claims fees justified by enforcing orders and protecting assets	Remanded for detailed findings; fee basis and reasonableness must be supported by record evidence

Moa v. Edwards, 2011 UT App 140 (Utah Court of Appeals, 2011) (sanctions and preservation of error in discovery sanctions)
Chen v. Stewart, 2004 UT 82 (Utah Supreme Court, 2004) (due-process and notice considerations in civil proceedings)