Marie J. (Marchiori) Eremita v. Cristiano A. Marchiori, 150 A.3d 336

Marie J. (Marchiori) Eremita and Cristiano A. Marchiori divorced after a long marriage (no minor children); Eremita filed for divorce in 2012 on irreconcilable differences.
Bangor District Court entered judgment on August 14, 2015 dividing assets/debts, awarding spousal support, and denying retroactive interim support and attorney fees.
Eremita filed a single post-judgment motion purporting to seek (1) further findings of fact and conclusions of law under M.R. Civ. P. 52(b), (2) a new trial under M.R. Civ. P. 59(a), and (3) amendment or alteration of the judgment under M.R. Civ. P. 59(e).
Rule 52(b) requires a motion for additional findings be filed within 14 days and must include the proposed findings and conclusions requested.
Eremita’s motion did not include any proposed findings or conclusions as required by Rule 52(b).
The district court denied her motion; Eremita appealed only the denial of that post-judgment motion to the Law Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether district court erred by denying request for further findings/conclusions under Rule 52(b)	Eremita argued the court should have supplied additional findings and conclusions	Marchiori argued the Rule requires the motion to include proposed findings and Eremita’s motion did not comply	Court affirmed: denial proper because motion failed to include the required proposed findings and conclusions
Whether the court erred in denying a new trial under Rule 59(a)	Eremita claimed errors warranting a new trial	Marchiori defended the judgment and trial court rulings	Not reached on merits; court found remaining contentions unpersuasive and did not address them further
Whether property division and spousal support calculations were erroneous	Eremita challenged division and support calculations	Marchiori defended court’s division and support awards	Not addressed on merits; appellate court found challenges unpersuasive
Whether denial of attorney fees was erroneous	Eremita sought attorney fees	Marchiori opposed fee award	Not addressed on merits; appellate court found challenge unpersuasive

Dalton v. Dalton, 99 A.3d 723 (Maine 2014) (standard of review for denial of request for additional findings)
Viola v. Viola, 109 A.3d 634 (Maine 2015) (standards governing post-judgment motions)
Madore v. Me. Land Use Regulation Comm’n, 715 A.2d 157 (Maine 1998) (appellate review principles)
Larochelle v. Cyr, 707 A.2d 799 (Maine 1998) (appellate standards for addressing claims)

Judgment affirmed.