Maria K. Viola v. Gordon E. Viola
109 A.3d 634
| Me. | 2015Background
- Gordon and Maria Viola married in 1992; Gordon purchased a house (44 Stillman St.) before marriage and later conveyed it to both as joint tenants. Stillman value ≈ $300,000 with mortgage ≈ $87,000.
- Maria filed for divorce in 2012; parties opened a $100,000 HELOC on Stillman and used those funds plus $10,000 to buy 7 Rangeley Rd. (value ≈ $150,000).
- Interim order: Maria to reside at Stillman; Gordon at Rangeley. Gordon was ordered to obtain a conventional mortgage and pay off the HELOC but had not done so by the final hearing.
- At trial, Gordon (age 51) earned ≈ $90,000 as a merchant mariner; Maria (age 47) was a long-time homemaker with limited recent earnings, significant health problems, and dependent on Gordon’s health insurance.
- District Court ordered: sell Rangeley to pay HELOC, ≈ $37,000 marital debt, unpaid Stillman taxes, and Maria’s attorney fees; awarded Stillman to Maria (with mortgage/utilities and potential student-loan co‑signed liability); Gordon liable for any sale deficiency and awarded remaining proceeds; Gordon ordered to pay $2,250/month spousal support.
- On appeal, Gordon challenged spousal support, the unequal property/debt division, and the attorney-fee award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spousal support | Maria: needs support due to lower income, health issues, and need for insurance | Gordon: award abused discretion | Affirmed; court’s findings supported award of $2,250/month (no clear error) |
| Property division | Maria: majority assets to her (Stillman) and debts allocated to Gordon are just given circumstances | Gordon: unequal division is improper | Affirmed; division was supported by record and relevant statutory factors |
| Attorney fees award | Maria: counsel submitted affidavit estimating fees (~$18,585) and sought fee award; court ordered $25,000 | Gordon: award unsupported, possibly duplicative of marital debt | Vacated in part; fee award remanded for redetermination because affidavit insufficient to justify $25,000 |
| Relationship of marital debt to fee award / total obligation | Maria: (implied) fees paid via credit cards are part of marital debt; court ordered Gordon to pay marital debt too | Gordon: unclear whether he was ordered to pay both the fee award and debt that includes payments to counsel, possibly overpaying him | Remanded for clarification whether and to what extent Gordon must pay Maria’s attorney fees and whether those fees overlap with marital debt (possible double recovery) |
Key Cases Cited
- Doucette v. Washburn, 766 A.2d 578 (Me. 2001) (standard for disturbing divorce judgments: clear error, legal error, or abuse of discretion)
- Finucan v. Williams, 73 A.3d 1056 (Me. 2013) (spousal support reviewed for abuse of discretion; factual findings reviewed for clear error)
- Nadeau v. Nadeau, 957 A.2d 108 (Me. 2008) (standards for awarding attorney fees and required affidavit contents)
- Lesko v. Stanislaw, 86 A.3d 14 (Me. 2014) (property division review: abuse of discretion; court must consider statutory factors)
- Skibinski v. Skibinski, 964 A.2d 641 (Me. 2009) (just distribution need not be equal; must be fair considering circumstances)
- Laqualia v. Laqualia, 30 A.3d 838 (Me. 2011) (attorney-fee awards in domestic relations matters committed to trial court’s discretion)