Jenkins v. Jenkins
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 845
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Jenkins spouses married in 2002 and separated in 2009; dissolution trial followed.
- Trial court classified the farm as marital property valued at $185,000 and awarded it to Mr. Jenkins.
- Ms. Jenkins’s assets and debts at trial were disputed; she claimed lower assets and higher debts than Mr. Jenkins testified.
- A living trust was created in January 2008 and property was conveyed to the trust; both parties were co-trustees.
- The court awarded Ms. Jenkins wedding rings as marital property and denied maintenance; appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Farm characterization | Farm was non-marital under the trust terms. | Farm was martial despite trust; transmutation via joint title. | Farm remains marital property. |
| Wedding rings characterization | Rings were Ms. Jenkins’s non-marital gift. | Rings were marital property. | Rings are non-marital; trial court erred in labeling as marital property. |
| Marital misconduct finding | Judge erred by relying on misconduct to justify unequal division. | Court properly considered conduct among other factors. | Record insufficient to conclusively determine misconduct impact; issue discussed but not decisive. |
| Rule 73.01 findings | Court failed to make required findings of fact on misconduct and unequal division. | The findings were adequate to support the division. | Rule 73.01 findings missing; issue preserved but not reversible due to preservation rules. |
Key Cases Cited
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review for dissolution judgments)
- Selby v. Selby, 149 S.W.3d 472 (Mo.App. W.D.2004) (non-marital property and trust implications in dissolution)
- Seggelke v. Seggelke, 319 S.W.3d 461 (Mo.App. E.D.2010) (trusts and marital property classification; equitable division)
- Blydenburg-Dixon v. Dixon, 277 S.W.3d 815 (Mo.App. W.D.2009) (transmutation from separate to marital property requires clear and convincing evidence)
- Heineman v. Heineman, 768 S.W.2d 130 (Mo.App. W.D.1989) (gift characterization for property transferred within marriage)