Kent v. Carter-Kent
235 Ariz. 309
Ariz. Ct. App.2014Background
- After a 15-year marriage, Richard E. Kent petitioned for dissolution; he is a 50% shareholder in Kent & Wittekind, P.C.
- Disputes arose over valuing the community’s interest in the Law Firm and the Turner Litigation Proceeds (TLP).
- At trial, Wife’s expert valued the Law Firm at $920,350 and Husband’s expert at $701,000; the court awarded Husband the Law Firm interest and treated the TLP as a Law Firm asset with an equitable offset of $460,000 to Wife.
- The Decree (Oct. 6, 2009) awarded Wife a $460,000 judgment and reserved jurisdiction to determine the TLP and Law Firm value; the Decree was amended to remove the offset and finalize the Judgment.
- Wife later moved to resolve outstanding TLP issues; the court dismissed, and Wife sought a new trial/reconsideration arguing improper treatment of TLP; the court denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wife’s TLP claim is barred by final judgment | Kent contends TLP value is resolved by the Decree and cannot be revisited. | Kent argues the TLP issue remains a community asset to be allocated, not waived. | Wife's TLP claim barred; final judgment and judicial estoppel prevent reconsideration. |
| Whether res judicata bars reopening the August 29, 2009 order | Wife asserts the August order’s methodology should apply and is final upon Decree. | No res judicata because the August order was not final and the Decree reserved jurisdiction. | Res judicata does not bar reopening; August order not final due to reserved jurisdiction. |
| Whether the motion for new trial improperly sought a revaluation of Law Firm | Wife sought to value the TLP as a separate asset and apply the August order’s methodology. | There was no separate asset revaluation issue properly raised; motion raised a new argument. | Waived; new trial motion cannot be used to revalue Law Firm; not properly raised. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mecham v. City of Glendale, 15 Ariz. App. 402 (App. 1971) (litigant barred from adopting contrary position after relief based on initial position)
- Spector v. Spector, 23 Ariz. App. 131, 531 P.2d 176 (App. 1975) (partial judgment reserved pending outcome of related litigation)
- Conant v. Whitney, 190 Ariz. 290, 947 P.2d 864 (App. 1997) (new argument cannot be raised in motion for new trial)
- Lopez v. Lopez, 125 Ariz. 309, 609 P.2d 579 (App. 1980) (decree interpreted by its natural and legal import)
- Dressler v. Morrison, 212 Ariz. 279, 130 P.3d 978 (App. 2006) (final judgment principles in property disposition)