Mullen v. Mullen, 2017 Ohio 77

Patrick and Bethanne Mullen divorced after 27 years of marriage; no unemancipated children at trial and most debts were discharged in bankruptcy.
At trial Patrick (52) worked full-time; Bethanne (51) worked part-time as a nurse’s aide and testified she has Charcot–Marie–Tooth disease limiting full‑time work.
Parties disputed personal property (including jewelry); issue was resolved when Bethanne returned Patrick’s property after oral argument, rendering that claim moot on appeal.
Trial court awarded Bethanne spousal support of $1,800/month (plus 2% processing) and ordered Patrick to maintain life insurance naming her beneficiary to secure the spousal‑support obligation.
A Parent PLUS loan taken during the marriage in Patrick’s name was referenced in the record; the trial court ordered Patrick to indemnify Bethanne on the Sallie Mae debt but did not make an express finding whether the loan was marital or separate.
Patrick appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) property retention/order regarding jewelry, (2) spousal support calculation (including treatment of Parent PLUS loan and lack of expert medical evidence), and (3) requirement to maintain life insurance to secure spousal support.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Bethanne)	Defendant's Argument (Patrick)	Held
Trial court order allowing wife to retain husband’s personal property if he didn’t return her property	Order was proper to effect property division and protect wife's items	Order was error and deprived husband of separate property	Moot — parties resolved property return; appellate court declined to reach merits
Award of $1,800/month spousal support: consideration of Parent PLUS loan and medical proof	Spousal support appropriate based on income disparity, long marriage, wife’s health, and trial court considered loan and other factors	Court erred by not treating Parent PLUS loan as marital debt to be shared and by relying on non‑expert testimony about wife's inability to work full‑time	Partially sustained/partially overruled: court properly considered wife’s testimony about health without expert evidence; but remanded to determine whether Parent PLUS loan is marital or separate and if marital, equitably allocate and re-evaluate support
Order requiring husband to maintain life insurance to secure spousal support obligation that terminates on death	Life insurance warranted to protect support stream	Error because spousal support terminates on death, so life insurance cannot secure an obligation terminable on death	Sustained — ordering life insurance to secure a support obligation terminable on death was an abuse of discretion (order reversed as to life insurance)

Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (appellate review: abuse of discretion standard)