Hume v. Hume
2014 Ohio 1577
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Married in 1985; no children.
- Dissolution decree (2010) required sale of marital home; 15-day purchase window if defendant chose to buy.
- If defendant purchased, he must refinance or remove plaintiff’s liability and pay plaintiff $80,000 at closing.
- Retirement/pension clause reiterates $80,000 to plaintiff if husband purchased the property.
- Contempt motion (2010) for failure to comply with sale orders; trial court found contempt and imposed $500 attorney fees.
- Final judgment (2013) awarded plaintiff $6,593.18 (difference between reverse mortgage proceeds and $80,000) and $2,000 in attorney fees; affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meaning of 15‑day purchase provision | Hume purchased; decree entitles $80,000 to plaintiff. | Failure to purchase within 15 days defeats $80,000 obligation. | Court did not abuse discretion; provision intended to accelerate sale; $80,000 owed. |
| Award of attorney fees under RC 3105.73 | Fees reasonable due to contempt and post‑decree conduct. | Fees should be limited or not awarded. | Court did not err in awarding $2,000 under RC 3105.73. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rand v. Rand, 18 Ohio St.3d 356 (1985) (attorney-fee awards in family actions; standard unusually deferential to trial court)
- Dunbar v. Dunbar, 68 Ohio St.3d 369 (1994) (abuse of discretion standard for post-decree fees; equity-based analysis)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (trial court's interpretation of orders within its discretion)