2017 Ohio 9323
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Champa and Shanaka Fernando married in 1996, had three children, and Champa filed for divorce in February 2015; final hearing occurred March 15, 2016 and final decree was entered October 19, 2016.
- Parties owned a marital residence in Dublin, Ohio and five Sri Lankan properties: Seeduwa (one), Bollatha (three), and Colombo (one containing land and a multi-unit building). They submitted joint stipulations and a settlement memorandum on some issues before trial.
- Trial court awarded Seeduwa and Bollatha properties to Shanaka, held the Colombo land to be Champa’s separate property, and treated the Colombo building as marital property with each party entitled to half the equity; it also awarded Champa half the profits from a 2013 sale of the Ja‑Ela property.
- The court did not state a termination date of the marriage for property valuation, effectively using the October 19, 2016 judgment entry date rather than the March 15, 2016 final hearing date.
- Multiple appraisals of the Sri Lankan properties were admitted (2011, 2015, and a 2016 appraisal Champa submitted but whose appraiser did not testify); the court relied inconsistently on those appraisals when valuing the Colombo building.
- On appeal, Shanaka raised six assignments of error challenging the valuation date, exclusion of vehicle equity, value of the Colombo property, rental income allocation, treatment of Ja‑Ela proceeds, and classification of Colombo land as separate property.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Champa) | Defendant's Argument (Shanaka) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper termination date for valuing marital property | Use statutory presumption: value through final hearing date (Mar. 15, 2016) | Court used final judgment date (Oct. 19, 2016); that was erroneous and arbitrary | Court abused discretion by not addressing presumption or explaining choice; assignment sustained (remand) |
| Inclusion of vehicle equity in division | Trial awarded vehicles to each party as provided; no need to alter stipulations | Court excluded two vehicles from property division contrary to stipulation/intent | No abuse of discretion; assignment overruled |
| Valuation of Colombo building | Use more recent appraisals (2015 or 2016) | Court adopted 2011 appraisal value without explanation | Court abused discretion for failing to provide rational basis for choosing 2011 appraisal; assignment sustained (remand) |
| Allocation/amount of rental income from Colombo building | Trial made specific rental‑income finding ($28,333.33) but record lacks evidentiary support | Shanaka sought half of total rental receipts (claimed ≈ $60,000) | Court’s rental‑income finding is unsupported by competent evidence; assignment sustained (remand) |
| Treatment of proceeds from sale of Ja‑Ela property | Champa entitled to half the proceeds from the 2013 sale | Shanaka used proceeds for a business and argues offsets for Champa’s business losses | Court reasonably awarded Champa one‑half of sale proceeds; no abuse of discretion; assignment overruled |
| Classification of Colombo land as separate property | Deed, donor affidavit, and testimony show gift to Champa alone | Shanaka argued use of marital funds and other indicia made land marital | Trial court’s finding Champa’s separate property is supported by competent, credible evidence; assignment overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp., 50 Ohio St.3d 157 (Ohio 1990) (definition of "unreasonable" decision and review standard)