Highsmith v. Highsmith
289 Ga. 841
| Ga. | 2011Background
- Wife and Husband married in 1993; bench trial produced a final divorce decree on July 14, 2010.
- Trial court found Wife’s Scottrade account was marital property, and awarded it to Wife in the property division.
- Husband’s office and an undivided four-lot tract (adjacent to the marital home) were found non-marital or partially non-marital.
- County tax records were used to value most real estate assets for equitable distribution upon request of the parties.
- Wife moved for new trial; appellate review sought on multiple takeaways, leading to partial reversal and remand.
- Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, remanding for reallocation of marital property consistent with opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Scottrade account is marital property. | Highsmith; account originated pre-marriage; funds remained largely non-marital. | Highsmith; proceeds commingled do not convert non-marital funds. | Scottrade not marital; remand for redivision of estate. |
| Whether source of funds rule applied inconsistently. | Wife asserts rule should apply to all funds including Scottrade. | Husband argues rule inapplicable to Scottrade funds due to lack of evidence. | Court did not err; distinct treatment of office vs. Scottrade funds affirmed. |
| Sufficiency of premarital contribution evidence for Husband’s office. | Testimony insufficient to prove premarital contribution. | Trial court could credit Husband’s testimony; no contrary evidence. | No merit; trial court could credit testimony. |
| Valuation of land adjacent to marital home using county tax records. | Value determined by county records; both parties accepted. | Husband’s non-marital equity should be recognized. | Valuation within accepted method; no error; portion deemed marital/ non-marital as found. |
Key Cases Cited
- Payson v. Payson, 274 Ga. 231 (Ga. 2001) (identifies when marital status depends on factual record; non-marital funds rule applicability)
- Dupree v. Dupree, 287 Ga. 319 (Ga. 2010) (broad discretion in equitably dividing marital property)
- Hunter v. Hunter, 289 Ga. 9 (Ga. 2011) (standard for reviewing division of marital property)
- Huling v. Huling, 289 Ga. 55 (Ga. 2011) (use of county tax records for valuation is permissible)
- Yates v. Yates, 259 Ga. 131 (Ga. 1989) (remand guidance when trial court errors require reexamination)