Johnson v. Bick
2021 MT 222N
| Mont. | 2021Background
- Thomas Bick and Kathleen Johnson married in 1987; they have two daughters and lived in Billings. Johnson moved to Bozeman June 14, 2016, and filed for dissolution October 24, 2016.
- District Court valued the marital estate as of October 24, 2016 (the petition filing date) and awarded the marital home to Bick with an equalization payment due 90 days after the Decree (due March 31, 2019).
- Bick paid the equalization payment late (October 21, 2020); the court excused contempt but awarded Johnson post-judgment interest of $11,676.59.
- Tax/FALSEA dispute: Johnson filed FAFSA in October 2017 using only her income and testified that filing jointly would reduce H.B.’s financial aid; the court ordered the parties to file married but separately for 2017 and allocated dependency exemptions (H.B. to Bick earlier eligibility; K.B. to Johnson).
- Child-support determinations: court set child-support start date (April 2017), allowed specified dollar-for-dollar credits for child-related expenses, and granted Bick a $100/month variance to account for parenting-related lodging/meals; it excluded credits for expenses characterized as gifts or parenting facilitation (e.g., hotel stays at soccer events).
- QDROs for Bick’s 403(b) and pension (prepared by Johnson’s counsel) were entered as stipulated; each QDRO imposed a $300 one-time review fee, which the court ordered Bick to pay.
Issues
| Issue | Bick's Argument | Johnson's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation date for marital estate | Court should have used June 14, 2016 (date Johnson moved/separation) because Johnson premeditated filing and that date reflects end of marriage | October 24, 2016 (petition filing) is reasonable; no evidence of material change between June and Oct 2016 | Court did not abuse discretion in using Oct 24, 2016; no material change shown between dates |
| Post-judgment interest on equalization payment | Interest award inequitable because Bick couldn’t refinance and believed no final judgment pending; lacked notice of appeal deadline | Interest is statutory once money is due post-judgment; Johnson’s right vested on Decree date | Award of post-judgment interest was required by law and proper |
| Tax filing status and dependency exemptions | Court erred: no evidence filing jointly would harm FAFSA; separate filing caused extra tax liability and Bick bore liability; court should have adjusted equalization | Johnson credibly testified FAFSA already filed and joint filing would reduce H.B.’s aid; primary custodial parent entitled to dependent exemption for K.B. | Court’s factual finding on FAFSA impact not clearly erroneous; awarding K.B.’s exemption to Johnson and denying adjustment to equalization was not an abuse of discretion |
| Child-support credits & QDRO review fees | Motel/campground expenses for daughters’ activities should count as credits against arrears; court improperly ordered Bick to pay QDRO fees | Those expenses are parenting facilitation/gifts and are addressed by the variance, not credits; QDROs were stipulated and fees proper | Court properly denied credits for parenting-travel expenses (variance covers them); ordering Bick to pay QDRO review fees was not an abuse of discretion (issue not preserved but reviewed leniently) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Wagner, 208 Mont. 369, 679 P.2d 753 (district court has discretion to select valuation date for marital assets)
- In re Marriage of Geror, 299 Mont. 33, 996 P.2d 381 (date of separation may be used to value marital estate)
- In re Marriage of Hochhalter, 307 Mont. 261, 37 P.3d 665 (unique circumstances can modify valuation-date rule)
- Knudson v. Knudson, 191 Mont. 204, 622 P.2d 1025 (post-judgment interest is a right once money is due)
- Resner v. N. Pac. Ry., 161 Mont. 177, 505 P.2d 86 (judgment bears interest from entry date)
- In re Marriage of Debuff, 310 Mont. 382, 50 P.3d 1070 (courts should consider costs attendant to property division)
- Williams v. Budke, 186 Mont. 71, 606 P.2d 515 (custodial parent controls use of child support)
- Richards v. Trusler, 381 Mont. 357, 360 P.3d 1126 (trial court has broad discretion to equitably divide marital property)