Jennifer A. Young v. Michael S. Young
120 A.3d 106
Me.2015Background
- Jennifer and Michael Young married in May 2003 and have three minor children.
- Jennifer filed for divorce in December 2012; after a two-day hearing, the 2014 judgment granted Jennifer sole parental rights, limited Michael's contact supervised up to three hours every other week, and allowed Jennifer to supervise or designate supervision at her election.
- The court awarded Jennifer $3,263 in child support arrearages and set aside Michael's Shaw’s Supervalu retirement account to Jennifer in lieu of spousal support, plus certain property as nonmarital; each party received a vehicle; remaining marital personalty went to the party in possession; Jennifer was to pay her own attorney fees.
- Michael timely moved for findings of fact and conclusions of law under Rule 52(a) seeking further address of spousal support, nonmarital property, certain marital personalty, and attorney fees; the court denied the motion and ordered Michael to pay Jennifer $10,000 in attorney fees.
- On appeal, Michael challenges the propriety of the parental rights determination, the calculation of child support arrearages, the characterization of property as marital or nonmarital, the overall division of marital property, and attorney fees.
- The Maine Supreme Judicial Court vacates portions of the judgment related to the Shaw’s retirement account, all tangible marital personal property, and the attorney fees, and remands for further proceedings; the child support arrearage determination is affirmed as corrected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parental rights and contact supervision | Young contends Jennifer's supervision discretion erodes Michael's rights of contact. | Young argues the court abused its discretion without express factual findings supporting best interests. | No abuse of discretion; supervised, limited contact in Jennifer's control is in the children's best interests. |
| Calculation of child support arrearages | Young claims arrearage totaled $3,263. | Court should credit $210 for five supervised visits. | Arrearage reduced to $3,053; arrearage affirmed as corrected. |
| Shaw’s retirement account in lieu of spousal support | Jennifer's receipt of the retirement account constitutes a mischaracterization of spousal support. | Property division uses the retirement account to effect an equitable division given waiver of alimony. | Award vacated; remand for findings and conclusions on the retirement account award. |
| Classification and distribution of personal property | Court erred by misclassifying marital vs. nonmarital property and distributing items accordingly. | items should be distributed per marital/nonmarital status as determined by evidence. | Vacate awards of tangible marital personal property; remand to correct misclassifications and reassess overall property division. |
| Attorney fees | Attorney fees award should stand consistent with the economic provisions. | Fees depend on economic outcomes requiring reconsideration if economic issues change. | Vacate attorney fees award; remand for reconsideration in light of remanded economic issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sullivan v. Doe, 2014 ME 109 (Me. 2014) (review standard for child welfare and best interests; abuse of discretion)
- Malenko v. Handrahan, 2009 ME 96 (Me. 2009) (mandates findings to support judgment; Rule 52(a) mandatory for findings on motion)
- Bayley v. Bayley, 602 A.2d 1152 (Me. 1992) (duty to provide findings of fact and conclusions of law on divorce appeals)
- Dalton v. Dalton, 2014 ME 108 (Me. 2014) (Rule 52(a) requirements and sufficiency of findings)
- Pederson v. Pederson, 644 A.2d 1045 (Me. 1994) (interplay between economic issues and attorney fees in divorce)
- Avery v. Kennebec Millwork, Inc., 2004 ME 147 (Me. 2004) (standard for division of marital property; evidentiary support required)
- Sloan v. Christianson, 2012 ME 72 (Me. 2012) (standard of review for domestic relations findings; clear error/abuse of discretion)
- Miliano v. Miliano, 2012 ME 100 (Me. 2012) (marital property characterization and review standards)
- Thumith v. Thumith, 2013 ME 67 (Me. 2013) (abuse of discretion in property division; factual findings review)