Drouhard v. Drouhard
2017 Ohio 7305
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Franklin (husband) filed for divorce in Jan 2015; the parties had been separated since Feb 2007 after an 1987 marriage.
- Wife moved for temporary spousal support in March 2015; the magistrate denied it and the trial court overruled her objections.
- Final hearing held Feb 2016; magistrate found parties incompatible and used Feb 1, 2007 as de facto marriage termination date for property division.
- Magistrate ordered spousal support: $150/month for one-third the marriage duration (record adopted by trial court), total computed as 73 months; trial court adopted decision and overruled Wife’s objections.
- Wife appealed, arguing (1) denial of temporary support, inadequate final spousal support and denial of attorney fees; and (2) erroneous de facto termination date and inequitable property division.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wife) | Defendant's Argument (Husband) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of temporary spousal support was erroneous | Regina argued she needed interim support and the court abused discretion by denying it | Husband relied on long separation and magistrate/trial-court discretion to deny temporaries | Overruled — Wife failed to brief the temporary-support argument on appeal, so it was forfeited |
| Whether final spousal-support amount/duration ($150/month for 73 months) was an abuse of discretion | Wife argued award was inadequate given income disparity and her disability/poverty | Court found trial court considered R.C. 3105.18 factors and long separation, husband’s intermittent assistance, and affirmed amount | Affirmed as to amount (not an abuse); reversed as to duration calculation (mathematical error) — remand to correct duration |
| Whether de facto termination date (Feb 1, 2007) was improper | Wife argued marriage continued later (e.g., last joint tax return 2012 or final hearing 2016) so termination date was wrong | Court relied on separation, lack of reconciliation, separate residences/cohabitation, and mutual belief marriage ended in 2007 | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion in selecting Feb 1, 2007 as de facto termination date |
| Whether trial court erred by denying attorney’s fees and costs | Wife sought fees; argued inequity given her financial condition | Husband relied on trial court’s discretion and procedural defaults | Forfeited — Wife did not specifically object below to magistrate’s failure to award fees, so appellate review waived |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
- Pons v. Ohio State Med. Bd., 66 Ohio St.3d 619 (Ohio 1993) (appellate court should not substitute its judgment for trial court under abuse-of-discretion review)
- Berish v. Berish, 69 Ohio St.2d 318 (Ohio 1982) (trial court has discretion in establishing marriage duration for valuation)