859 N.W.2d 886
Neb. Ct. App.2015Background
- Terry and Lori Logan married in 1973; Lori filed for dissolution in August 2012; decree entered October 2013; Terry appealed.
- Disputed assets: the marital residence (purchased 1998) subject to a small primary mortgage and two loans for which the couple’s sons had used the house as collateral; both parties sought the residence.
- Terry operated a tax-preparation/bookkeeping business (formerly an LLC) and presented an expert range of $0–$70,000; Lori’s expert estimated about $66,000.
- The court valued the home at $185,000 but reduced equity by the primary mortgage and the two sons’ loan balances; the home was awarded to Lori.
- The court awarded Terry the business and valued it at $25,000 after weighing both experts’ testimony and other evidence.
- The court split other assets/debts (including an Ameriprise account and several credit-card and medical debts) and ordered temporary spousal support to Lori from March 1, 2013 until entry of the decree; each party to pay their own attorney fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Terry) | Defendant's Argument (Lori) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation/equity reduction of marital residence by sons’ loans | Court erred by reducing home equity for sons’ loans because sons were paying them and reduction is inequitable | Both parties had argued at trial that the sons’ loans created liens reducing equity | No abuse of discretion; court properly reduced equity by those loan balances because both parties presented that position |
| Valuation of Terry’s business | Court erred in assigning any value beyond equipment; business value could be zero | Business had value (Lori’s expert ~ $66,000); evidence supported positive value | No abuse of discretion; $25,000 valuation supported by record and credibility determinations |
| Division of other property and debts (Pioneer Bank loan, GM Mastercard, Ameriprise account, other debts) | Several debts were improperly treated as marital or misvalued (e.g., Pioneer loan used for attorney fees; furniture purchases) | Court’s allocations accounted for disputed items and reductions; evidence supported marital characterization | No abuse of discretion; appellant failed to show record support for reversals; court’s allocations were reasonable |
| Temporary alimony duration | Temporary support should have terminated earlier (after Lori’s deposition or trial) because Lori said she was not requesting permanent alimony | Lori sought temporary alimony by motion; the court ordered temporary support until conclusion of the matter and appellant did not seek modification | No abuse of discretion; record shows Lori sought temporary support and Terry did not move to modify; temporary support properly terminated on entry of decree |
Key Cases Cited
- Pohlmann v. Pohlmann, 20 Neb. App. 290, 824 N.W.2d 63 (2012) (standard of appellate review and abuse-of-discretion in dissolution property/support determinations)
- Lockwood v. Lockwood, 205 Neb. 818, 290 N.W.2d 636 (1980) (trial court credibility determinations receive weight on appeal in divorce valuation disputes)
- Plog v. Plog, 20 Neb. App. 383, 824 N.W.2d 749 (2012) (three-step process for equitable division under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 and fairness standard)
- In re Interest of Hope L. et al., 278 Neb. 869, 775 N.W.2d 384 (2009) (appellant’s duty to present record supporting assigned errors)
- In re Interest of Jamyia M., 281 Neb. 964, 800 N.W.2d 259 (2011) (briefing requirements for assignments of error)
- In re Interest of Samantha L. & Jasmine L., 286 Neb. 778, 839 N.W.2d 265 (2013) (assignments-of-error must appear in a separate section; consequences for noncompliance)