Jeanne Porter v. David Wayne Porter, 397 P.3d 196

Jeanne Porter (Wife) and David Porter (Husband) married in 1997; no children of the marriage. Wife had children from a prior relationship.
Husband worked for the Air National Guard and Union Pacific Railroad; inherited and sold grandparents’ home and later purchased property on County Road 215A titled solely in his name (assessed ≈ $259,000; mortgage + HELOC ≈ $220,000; ≈ $39,000 equity).
Wife brought $20,000 into the marriage and received ≈ $50,000 from her mother to buy an 18th Street home titled solely in her name; by trial she had increased debt on that property (HELOC) so there was little to no equity (owed ≈ $163,000).
Both had vehicles and unsecured debts (Wife credit card ≈ $11,600; Husband truck loan ≈ $72,000 and credit card ≈ $8,000). They both sought a contested divorce; Wife sought temporary alimony and attorney fees (denied) and later permanent post-decree alimony ($2,000/month x 10 years).
At bench trial the district court awarded Wife the 18th Street home (and related debt), Husband the County Road 215A property (and ≈ $39,000 equity), Wife one-half of Husband’s railroad retirement for marital years, and the 1959 El Camino (with its debt); the court denied Wife’s request for alimony, finding she could work and that the parties kept finances largely separate.
Wife appealed, arguing the property division and denial of alimony were abuses of discretion. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the property division was an abuse of discretion	Wife: division left her destitute; Husband received essentially the entire estate	Husband: awards reflected who purchased properties, gifts used to buy respective homes, debts assigned with properties; equitable division	Court: affirmed — division was just and equitable; not arbitrary or conscience-shocking
Whether denying post-divorce alimony was an abuse of discretion	Wife: needed $2,000/mo for 10 years to substitute marital support	Husband: Wife was able to work, finances were separate, property awards (including railroad retirement share) made alimony unnecessary; Husband’s income largely tied to debts	Court: affirmed — district court reasonably found Wife could work, property division reduced need for alimony, and Husband lacked discretionary income to support alimony

Kamm v. Kamm, 365 P.3d 779 (Wyo. 2016) (standard for appellate review of discretionary family-law decisions).
Peak v. Peak, 383 P.3d 1084 (Wyo. 2016) (equitable property division may be unequal; reversal only for decisions that shock the conscience).
Lopez v. Lopez, 116 P.3d 1098 (Wyo. 2005) (appellate court will not substitute its judgment for district court on discretionary findings).
Johnson v. Johnson, 11 P.3d 948 (Wyo. 2000) (purpose of alimony is post-divorce substitute for marital support; property awards are preferred modern substitute).
Stevens v. Stevens, 318 P.3d 802 (Wyo. 2014) (policy discouraging perpetual claims on ex-spouse earnings; encourage fresh starts where possible).