In Re the Marriage of Michelle Anne Kraker and Leonard Paul Kraker Upon the Petition of Michelle Anne Kraker, petitioner-appellee/cross-appellant, and Concerning Leonard Paul Kraker, respondent-appellant/cross-appellee.
16-1739
| Iowa Ct. App. | Aug 16, 2017Background
- Leonard and Michelle Kraker married in 1986; two adult children. Leonard (age 55) was a long‑time Sioux City firefighter contributing to the Municipal Fire & Police Retirement System of Iowa (MFPRS); Michelle (age 56) owned a hair‑salon business.
- Michelle petitioned for dissolution in 2015. District court awarded Michelle: personal property valued at $7,500, her business (valued $24,500), 46% of Leonard’s pension (payable at benefit commencement), spousal support of $1,500/month until Leonard’s retirement, and $750 in trial attorney fees; Leonard received $1,500 personal property.
- Leonard moved to reopen to present Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) effects on Social Security; the court reopened the record, considered additional submissions, and made limited adjustments.
- Both parties appealed: Leonard challenged property division (pension valuation/division) and spousal support; Michelle cross‑appealed spousal support and sought additional attorney fees for trial and appeal.
- The appellate court affirmed the decree except it modified the pension award — directing pension division by marital property order using the Benson percentage formula and remanding to implement that formula; it denied additional spousal‑support and attorney‑fee relief and denied appellate fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Michelle) | Defendant's Argument (Leonard) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation of Michelle’s personal property | Michelle supported lower value (~$2,500) | Leonard argued much higher value using insurance schedule (~$151,950) | Court’s $7,500 valuation sustained as within permissible evidence; appellate court affirms |
| Division of Leonard’s pension | Michelle argued for 50% share | Leonard argued Benson formula should be applied and court misapplied it; also raised WEP/Social Security concerns | Court modified pension division: apply Benson percentage method (50% × years married contributing ÷ total years of accrual before retirement) via a marital property order; remanded to implement |
| Spousal support amount/duration | Michelle sought increase to $2,250/month | Leonard sought reduction to $868.56/month | Court affirmed $1,500/month until Leonard retires (sufficient under statutory factors) |
| Attorney fees (trial and appellate) | Michelle sought substantially more trial fees and $6,863 for appeal | Leonard opposed larger awards | Trial court did not abuse discretion in awarding only $750 trial fees to Michelle; appellate fees denied — each party bears own appeal costs |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Benson, 545 N.W.2d 252 (Iowa 1996) (establishes percentage method for dividing pension benefits)
- In re Marriage of Sullins, 715 N.W.2d 242 (Iowa 2006) (explains Benson fraction numerator/denominator and valuation timing)
- In re Marriage of McDermott, 827 N.W.2d 671 (Iowa 2013) (deference to trial court valuations within permissible evidence)
- In re Marriage of Hansen, 733 N.W.2d 683 (Iowa 2007) (weight given to trial court findings on valuation and credibility)
- In re Marriage of Branstetter, 508 N.W.2d 638 (Iowa 1993) (pensions are marital assets subject to division)
- In re Marriage of O’Connor, 584 N.W.2d 575 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998) (pensions must be divided equitably)
- In re Marriage of Davis, 608 N.W.2d 766 (Iowa 2000) (marital property order under Iowa Code equates to QDRO for public pensions)
- In re Marriage of Mauer, 874 N.W.2d 103 (Iowa 2016) (spousal‑support analysis uses statutory factors, not a formula)
- In re Marriage of Okland, 699 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2005) (factors for awarding appellate attorney fees)