Passyalia v. Moneir
2017 Ohio 7033
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Married in 1986; separated ~2006 when husband (Moneir) moved to Virginia; wife (Passyalia) remained in North Canton, OH with children. Parties reconciled only to litigate divorce filed by wife in July 2015; trial in Aug–Sep 2016; decree entered Sept. 12, 2016.
- During separation husband paid mortgage, taxes, insurance, and utilities on the marital residence. Both children are emancipated adults.
- Trial court's decree divided property and allocated debts, including (1) a 2010 Toyota 4‑Runner titled to husband, (2) a Canton Student Loan from 2005 incurred in both parents’ names for one adult daughter, and (3) a large U.S. Department of Education loan the husband signed for on behalf of the daughter.
- Husband appealed, arguing the property division was inequitable (challenging valuations/classifications) and that the court awarded spousal support before completing an equitable property division.
- Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded: it found reversible errors in certain valuation/assignment entries (Toyota valuation math discrepancy and the Canton Student Loan balance/assignment), but upheld the trial court’s classification of the DOE loan as husband’s separate obligation; remanded spousal support for reconsideration if affected by property corrections.
Issues
| Issue | Passyalia's Argument | Moneir's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court correctly valued and distributed the 2010 Toyota 4‑Runner | Trial court valuation/chart is correct (relied on trial exhibits) | Chart contains a math/discrepancy error producing an incorrect net value | Court found the discrepancy constituted reversible error (value/chart conflict) |
| Whether the Canton Student Loan (2005, in parents’ names) was correctly listed/allocated | Trial court’s charted balance and allocation correct | Trial record shows a much larger balance (~$9,530); allocation of $1,290 is unsupported | Court found the $1,290 figure/assignment was reversible error (insufficient support) |
| Whether the large U.S. Department of Education loan taken out by husband for adult daughter is marital or husband’s separate debt | Characterize loan as marital debt (presumption debts during marriage are marital absent proof) | Loan is husband’s separate obligation because wife was not a co‑signer and loan was taken after separation/emancipation | Court affirmed classification as husband’s separate debt (sufficient credible evidence to overcome marital presumption) |
| Whether court erred by awarding spousal support before completing equitable property division | Spousal award improper until property division corrected | Spousal support may stand if property division was properly done | Court sustained remand for spousal support insofar as property division errors may affect support; spousal award remanded for discretionary review |
Key Cases Cited
- Cherry v. Cherry, 66 Ohio St.2d 348 (establishes appellate abuse-of-discretion review for property division)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (standard for finding abuse of discretion)
- Berish v. Berish, 69 Ohio St.2d 318 (trial court has broad discretion to value marital assets)
- Eisler v. Eisler, 24 Ohio App.3d 151 (trial court should determine value of marital assets before dividing property)