Frazier v. Curry
104 So. 3d 220
Ala. Civ. App.2012Background
- Married in 1991, one child; separation in 2008; wife filed for divorce; pendente lite orders granted residence and restraint on marital asset use.
- Trial 2010: evidence of adulterous relationships by both spouses; wife income about $2,000/month; husband income varying from $42k to $331k annually; husband claimed 2010 earnings around $160k.
- Assets included multiple properties (residence, lake house, Gee’s Bend property, law office, apartments) and retirement accounts; wife inherited some properties; HELOC debt existed on marital residence.
- Parties testified to joint custody and blended assets; retirement accounts sizable (wife ≈ $217k, husband ≈ $410k).
- Judge awarded legal separation in 2011, ordered 70% of certain child-related expenses by husband, awarded specified properties, child support of $500, alimony of $2,000/month, and $85,000 from husband’s retirement to wife; postjudgment motions led to partial adjustments.
- On appeal, court reverses several portions, including retirement-asset division and alimony, and remands for reassessment; attorney-fee award to wife also reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 70% of child-related expenses is appropriate | Husband argues expenses exceed reasonable needs | Wife contends expenses relate to child needs and share is proper | 70% awarded to wife affirmed |
| Whether wife proved the portion of retirement benefits divisible under §30-2-51(b) | Wife failed to prove premarital accrual/interest attribution | Court should award under §30-2-51(b) as divisible | Reversed; no portion of retirement benefits awarded; remand for recalculation without retirement as divisible property |
| Whether $10,000 attorney fees to wife were proper | Fees reasonable given litigation outcomes | Fees should be reconsidered on remand due to property/alimony rework | Pretermitted; reversed and remanded for reconsideration on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Dyas v. Dyas, 683 So.2d 971 (Ala.Civ.App.1995) (discretion in high-income child support must relate to child needs and obligor ability)
- DuBois v. DuBois, 714 So.2d 308 (Ala.Civ.App.1998) (premarital portion of retirement benefits not includable)
- Piatt v. Piatt, 736 So.2d 632 (Ala.Civ.App.1999) (premarital retirement evidence insufficient for divisible award)
- Dunn v. Dunn, 891 So.2d 891 (Ala.Civ.App.2004) (illustrates divisible assets analysis when premarital value exists)
- Applegate v. Applegate, 863 So.2d 1123 (Ala.Civ.App.2003) (retirement benefits division and property division interrelation)