372 S.W.3d 496
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Husband and Wife married July 27, 1985; four children born of the marriage.
- In 2008 the couple separated and, in 2010, dissolution proceedings commenced.
- During the marriage, Husband owned real estate development interests and a gym (Northland Sports LLC).
- The couple held joint ownership in multiple Entities; debts and carrying costs affected the marital estate during a real estate downturn.
- The 2011 Judgment awarded joint custody, 50% of children’s college expenses, $2,500/month maintenance for one year, the marital home to Wife, and debts/ownership interests allocated to Husband with a maintenance-availability finding.
- Wife contested maintenance amount/duration, valuations, furniture division, college expenses, and attorney’s fees; the court affirmed the decree.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maintenance amount and duration | Wife argues $2,500/month for one year is insufficient and non-modifiable. | Husband contends the amount/duration are appropriate given needs and future prospects. | No abuse; award upheld as limited, non-modifiable maintenance for one year. |
| Valuation of Entities and Northland Sports | Wife asserts Husband's valuations discount carrying costs improperly. | Husband's valuations supported by expert; discounts appropriate. | Trial court's valuation approved; discounts adequately supported by record. |
| Division of Victorian furniture | Judgment language ambiguous regarding which pieces are included. | Language sufficiently identifies Victorian furniture; division ordered. | Point rejected; judgment not ambiguous. |
| 50% of college expenses | Wife argues inability to pay was ignored; Form 14 not used. | Court properly allocated 50% given potential earnings post-graduation. | No abuse; award upheld. |
| Attorney’s fees | Wife asserts disparity in resources warrants fees. | Trial court may deny fees; each bears own; resources not sole factor. | No abuse; each party to pay own fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. Green, 341 S.W.3d 893 (Mo.App. W.D.2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard; broad discretion in maintenance)
- Sweet v. Sweet, 154 S.W.3d 499 (Mo.App. W.D.2005) (review standards for dissolution decrees; deference to trial court)
- Isakson v. Isakson, 277 S.W.3d 784 (Mo.App. S.D.2009) (rehabilitative maintenance; need for timeframe evidence)
- Allen v. Allen, 927 S.W.2d 881 (Mo.App. W.D.1996) (upholding limited maintenance with definite future expectations)
- Harris v. Harris, 908 S.W.2d 854 (Mo.App. S.D.1995) (probable future earning prospects relevant to maintenance)
- Sabatino v. Sabatino, 314 S.W.3d 854 (Mo.App.W.D.2010) (abuse-of-discretion; valuation/asset division)
- Handy v. Handy, 338 S.W.3d 852 (Mo.App. W.D.2011) (maintenance/ability to pay not requiring asset depletion)
- Form v. Form? ( Sinclair v. Sinclair ), 837 S.W.2d 355 (Mo.App. W.D.1992) (Form 14 practice; record for child support)