Jenkins v. Jenkins
406 S.W.3d 919
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Wife appeals a dissolution and division of marital property after remand instructed by this court in Jenkins I.
- Husband initially received farm valued at $185,000 and majority of marital assets; wedding rings were mischaracterized as marital property.
- Remand directed wedding rings to Wife as nonmarital and an equalization payment of $4,000 from Husband to Wife; other divisions remained the same.
- Law of the case bars relitigation of issues that could have been raised in the first appeal, unless exceptional circumstances apply.
- Court held the law of the case forecloses Wife’s challenge to the disproportionate division and affirmed the equalization payment as fair under the circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Law of the case bar applies to property division | Jenkins I preserved and/or could have preserved the issue. | Law of the case bars relitigation of the division. | Law of the case bars the challenge. |
| Equity of the $4,000 equalization payment | Payment insufficient to truly equalize the division. | Equalization is not necessarily mathematical equality; fair and equitable enough. | Payment properly structured as equalization; no abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jenkins v. Jenkins, 368 S.W.3d 363 (Mo.App.W.D.2012) (remand and mandate affecting property division in this case)
- Walton v. City of Berkeley, 223 S.W.3d 126 (Mo. banc 2007) (law of the case doctrine governs relitigation)
- Williams v. Kimes, 25 S.W.3d 150 (Mo. banc 2000) (law of the case exceptions to preserve fairness)
- Alma Tel. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 40 S.W.3d 381 (Mo.App.W.D.2001) (law of the case applicability in administrative context)
- Guidry v. Charter Commc’ns, Inc., 308 S.W.3d 765 (Mo.App.E.D.2010) (remand scope and trial court's authority)
- Pope v. Ray, 298 S.W.3d 53 (Mo.App.W.D.2009) (mandate interpretation on remand)
- Bryant v. Bryant, 351 S.W.3d 681 (Mo.App.E.D.2011) (trial court bound to mandate; authority limited on remand)
- In re Marriage of Weinshenker, 177 S.W.3d 859 (Mo.App.E.D.2005) (recording preservation and review standards on remand)