2019 Ohio 3870
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Lee Q. Lewis and Kristen H. Elliot-Thomas were married in 2000 and had two daughters; Elliot-Thomas filed for divorce and the parties stipulated the complaint filing date would serve as the de facto end of the marriage period used for valuation.
- The matter proceeded to a three-day contested hearing (August 2018) on property division, business valuation, alleged financial misconduct (failure to file/pay income taxes for many years), and child support.
- The trial court divided property and debt, found Lewis engaged in financial misconduct (related to unpaid taxes), excluded certain tax liability from marital debts, awarded a $7,500 distributive award to Elliot-Thomas, and ordered Lewis to pay child support plus $14,750/year toward private out-of-state tuition/extracurricular costs.
- On appeal Lewis challenged (inter alia) the trial court’s use of multiple "during the marriage" valuation dates, the legal standard for finding financial misconduct, the child support/private tuition award, and the business valuation evidence.
- The Ninth District reversed and remanded: it held the trial court must pick one single "during the marriage" period and apply it consistently; that the court applied the wrong legal standard for financial misconduct; and that the court failed to apply required factors before ordering payment of the private school/tuition expenses. The court affirmed the admission/use of Elliot-Thomas’s business valuation expert evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper "during the marriage" valuation period | Elliot-Thomas relied on the trial court's mixed use of dates and credits for post-filing payments | Lewis argued the court improperly used multiple, inconsistent valuation end-dates to his detriment | Reversed; trial court must select and use a single, equitable "during the marriage" period and revalue/divide assets and debts accordingly; remand |
| Financial misconduct under R.C. 3105.171(E)(3) | Elliot-Thomas argued Lewis’s failure to file/pay taxes constituted financial misconduct warranting distributive relief | Lewis argued the trial court applied the wrong legal standard to find financial misconduct | Reversed; court applied incorrect standard. Finding financial misconduct requires a two-prong showing (wrongdoing that interferes with spouse’s property rights plus proof the wrongdoing produced profit or was intended to defeat the other spouse’s distribution); remand for proper analysis |
| Private school tuition/extracurriculars as child support | Elliot-Thomas sought an order that Lewis pay $14,750/year for tuition/extracurriculars as part of support | Lewis argued the court failed to consider the statutory/factor-based test (best interest, affordability, prior private schooling, continuity) and his ability to pay | Reversed; trial court failed to apply required factors and adequately consider ability to pay before ordering $14,750 in addition to the computed support; remand for recalculation |
| Business valuation expert evidence | Elliot-Thomas relied on her expert’s amended valuation report | Lewis contended the court should have credited his witness and objected to the amended report | Affirmed as to admission/consideration of the expert: Lewis did not preserve a successful challenge to the expert’s qualifications and the amended report corrected mathematical errors; no reversible error shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Pauly v. Pauly, 80 Ohio St.3d 386 (1997) (domestic relations court’s child support determinations reviewed for abuse of discretion; court must consider needs and standard of living)
- Murphy v. Reynoldsburg, 65 Ohio St.3d 356 (1992) (appellate courts should not make factual findings that are for the trial court to decide)