In Re the Marriage of Kevin Richard Huinker and Dody Jane Huinker Upon the Petition of Kevin Richard Huinker, and Concerning Dody Jane Huinker
16-1663
| Iowa Ct. App. | Sep 13, 2017Background
- Married in 2002; one child (born 2004). Parties separated in 2011 and had an informal 50/50 joint-physical-care schedule for several years prior to dissolution.
- Kevin (age 45 at trial) employed as state correctional officer; 2013 income $63,000; lived in a house owned by his mother.
- Dody (age 50 at trial) was disabled and receiving Social Security disability (~$15,948/year) and unemployed; owned premarital homes sold/purchased prior to marriage.
- Dissolution decree (Jan. 2016) awarded joint legal and physical care (continued the existing schedule), child support from Kevin of $454.44/month, Kevin to provide child health insurance, unreimbursed medical expenses to be shared (court originally ordered equal share up to $250, then guideline percentages over $250), no spousal support, division of IPERS with award to Dody, and limited trial attorney fees to Dody.
- On appeal, court affirmed most provisions but modified allocation of unreimbursed medical expenses (set percentages based on net incomes) and awarded Dody spousal support of $350/month; appellate attorney fees of $1,000 awarded to Dody (paid by Kevin).
Issues
| Issue | Dody's Argument | Kevin's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Physical care (joint care vs. primary to Dody) | Joint care inappropriate—high conflict, Kevin’s temper/alcohol, child’s exposure to Kevin’s other child; Dody sought sole physical care | Existing shared arrangement worked; historical 50/50 care supported continuation | Affirmed joint physical care as in child's best interest given history, communication, child’s well-being |
| Child support amount | If Dody awarded primary care, support should increase | Court used Kevin’s $63,000 income and existing joint-care formula | Affirmed $454.44/month (no change because joint care affirmed) |
| Allocation of unreimbursed medical expenses | Equal split criticized as inconsistent with guideline proportional sharing | Court used guideline worksheet but ordered equal share up to $250 then guideline percentages | Modified: allocate by net income — Kevin 78.88%, Dody 21.12% of unreimbursed medical expenses |
| Spousal support | Entitled to $750/month (13-year marriage, Dody disabled, limited earning capacity) | No spousal support originally awarded | Modified: award spousal support $350/month until death or Dody can access her share of Kevin’s IPERS |
| Property division — premarital home funds | Dody sought setoff of ~$18,862 as premarital asset | Court considered premarital origin but also contributions, Kevin’s sweat equity and payments | Affirmed district court: premarital funds not set aside; distribution considered overall equity |
| Property division — IPERS valuation period | Dody sought share from marriage date through trial (2002–2015) | Court awarded share only for marriage until separation (2002–2011) given long separation before trial | Affirmed district court: equitable to value IPERS only through separation years (8.5 years) |
| Attorney fees (trial and appeal) | Sought full trial fees ($2,786) and appellate fees | Court balanced each party’s ability to pay and property/alimony awards | Trial fees award not increased; appellate fees $1,000 awarded to Dody (paid by Kevin) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Fennelly, 737 N.W.2d 97 (Iowa 2007) (standard of de novo review in dissolution appeals)
- In re Marriage of Hansen, 733 N.W.2d 683 (Iowa 2007) (factors for awarding spousal support)
- In re Marriage of Berning, 745 N.W.2d 90 (Iowa Ct. App. 2007) (factors for joint physical care: approximation, communication, conflict, agreement on daily matters)
- In re Marriage of Benson, 545 N.W.2d 252 (Iowa 1996) (percentage method for dividing pension benefits)
- In re Marriage of Sullins, 715 N.W.2d 242 (Iowa 2006) (premarital assets considered in equitable distribution; attorney-fee analysis)
- In re Marriage of Branstetter, 508 N.W.2d 638 (Iowa 1993) (pensions as marital property)
- In re Marriage of Okland, 699 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2005) (factors for awarding appellate attorney fees)