Lykins v. Lykins
2018 Ohio 2144
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Husband and Wife married in 1996 and divorced after nearly 19 years; they have two minor daughters (born 2004, 2006).
- After contested proceedings the trial court designated Wife sole residential parent and granted Husband limited parenting time conditioned on anger/mental-health treatment; GAL recommended Wife.
- Trial court divided property, awarded the rental properties to Husband, imputed rental income to Husband (initially $38,682, later reduced to $31,482), and found rental net income marital while reduction in mortgage principal was not.
- Trial court awarded Wife spousal support (modified at final hearing to $600/month for seven years) and ordered Husband to pay $10,000 toward Wife’s attorney fees because of his litigation conduct and discovery failures.
- Trial court calculated child support from imputed incomes but failed to deduct Husband’s spousal-support obligation from his income and did not include Wife’s spousal-support award in her income; appellate court remanded solely for redetermination of child support.
Issues
| Issue | Husband’s Argument | Wife’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allocation of parental rights (sole vs shared) | Trial court abused discretion; should have ordered shared parenting | Trial court’s designation of Wife sole residential parent was correct | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; considered statutory factors and credibility; Husband’s conduct and anger supported sole residential parent award |
| Parenting time (amount) | Award of less-than-equal time was unreasonable | Award appropriate given best-interest factors and GAL recommendation | Affirmed: trial court’s parenting-time decision within discretion given evidence Husband missed/limited contact and conduct |
| Spousal support (appropriateness and imputed incomes) | Trial court erred in imputing rental income to Husband and should have imputed income to Wife | Wife was not voluntarily underemployed; trial court properly imputed rental income to Husband | Affirmed: trial court permissibly imputed $31,482 to Husband; declined to impute to Wife; $600/month award not an abuse of discretion |
| Child support calculation | Trial court miscalculated child support by not accounting for spousal-support payments in incomes | Trial court’s worksheet was adequate | Reversed in part: remanded for recalculation because trial court failed to deduct Husband’s spousal-support obligation from his income and failed to include Wife’s spousal-support award in her income on worksheet |
| Attorney-fee award | Trial court erred in ordering Husband to pay fees | Trial court properly considered Husband’s conduct, discovery abuses, and frivolous motions | Affirmed: $10,000 fee award was equitable and within trial court’s discretion |
| Distribution of rental properties / valuation | Trial court erred in valuing and failing to award Wife an equitable share of appreciation | Trial court reasonably credited Husband’s expert for 1996 values and found distribution equitable | Affirmed: trial court’s appraisal credibility and equitable division not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standards for abuse of discretion review)
- Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 1988) (deference to trial court in custody determinations)