Pillar, K. v. Pillar, D.
3300 EDA 2015
Pa. Super. Ct.Jan 13, 2017Background
- Kathleen M. Pillar (Wife) filed for divorce after separation; Master Pamela Wilson heard the case and issued a report recommending equitable distribution and alimony; the trial court adopted the report and entered a divorce decree on Oct. 14, 2015.
- Parties married in 2000, separated in 2013; Wife claimed disability and limited earning capacity; Husband appealed the decree.
- Master found marital debt of $24,480.43, allocated proceeds of the sale of the marital residence (Wife to receive $20,920.18), and divided other assets (Wife awarded alimony, Husband kept business and certain accounts).
- Master awarded Wife alimony of $280/month until age 65, finding she was incapable of full-time self-support and there was a disparity in earning capacity.
- Husband filed exceptions challenging debt valuation, treatment of Wife’s small pension, and the alimony award (amount and duration given Wife’s part-time work, SSDI and Social Security eligibility).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wife) | Defendant's Argument (Husband) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation and division of marital debt and distribution from house sale | Master’s valuation and allocation are supported by the record and master’s consideration of exhibits/testimony | Master miscalculated marital debt and improperly allocated proceeds and debt obligations (disagrees with $24,480.43 figure; claimed $22,775) | Court affirmed master/trial court — factfinder’s valuation and allocations were supported; no abuse of discretion |
| Treatment of Wife’s Wayne Memorial Hospital pension in equitable distribution | Pension considered among statutory factors; master addressed assets and contributions | Pension (monthly $115.25) should have been specifically included for equitable distribution | Court upheld master — pension treatment within master’s discretion and distribution scheme as a whole was just |
| Award of alimony given Wife’s part-time employment and receipt of SSDI | Alimony appropriate based on statutory factors: disparity in earning capacity, Wife’s disability and incapacity for full-time work, limited resources | Alimony improper because Wife works part-time, receives SSDI, and had equitable distribution benefits; Husband argued Wife not an innocent/injured spouse | Court affirmed alimony award ($280/month until 65) — master adequately considered the §3701(b) factors and evidence; no abuse of discretion |
| Duration of alimony until age 65 vs. Social Security eligibility at 62 | Award tailored to wife’s needs and overall distribution; master’s choice within discretion | Alimony should not run until 65 because Wife will be eligible for Social Security at 62 | Court upheld duration — choice within master's/trial court’s discretion after considering statutory factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Reber v. Reiss, 42 A.3d 1131 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (standard of review for equitable distribution)
- Smith v. Smith, 653 A.2d 1259 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (trial court may rely on submitted valuations for asset valuation)
- Baker v. Baker, 861 A.2d 298 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (court free to accept all, part, or none of valuation evidence)
- Moran v. Moran, 839 A.2d 1091 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (masters’ reports are advisory but entitled to full consideration)
- Schenk v. Schenk, 880 A.2d 633 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (consider distribution scheme as a whole)
- Teodorski v. Teodorski, 857 A.2d 194 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (court must consider statutory factors in equitable distribution)
- Mercatell v. Mercatell, 854 A.2d 609 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (statutory factors to consider in distribution)
- Isralsky v. Isralsky, 824 A.2d 1178 (Pa. Super. Ct.) (statutory factors for alimony under §3701(b))