Rhodenbaugh v. Rhodenbaugh
2019 ND 109
| N.D. | 2019Background
- Jay and Ashley Rhodenbaugh married in 2010, have two minor children; Jay farmed, Ashley was a homemaker.
- Jay filed for divorce in May 2016; October 2016 interim order gave Ashley primary residential responsibility and Jay unsupervised parenting time, ordered interim child and spousal support commencing December 2016.
- April 2017 interim order found Ashley in contempt, terminated her interim spousal support, compelled discovery, and restricted further filings until fees were paid.
- July 2017 trial resolved remaining issues; November 2017 final judgment awarded Ashley primary residential responsibility, denied spousal support, ordered child support beginning December 2017, and divided property; parties had stipulated to residential/parenting provisions before trial.
- Ashley appealed multiple interlocutory and final orders challenging application of the domestic-violence presumption, interim financial awards, denial of fees waiver, denial of attorney’s-fee award under the domestic-violence statute, contempt finding, trial time limit, findings on marriage duration, and denial of motion to reopen.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rhodenbaugh) | Defendant's Argument (Rhodenbaugh) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application of domestic-violence presumption to parenting time | Court wrongly shifted burden to Ashley after presumption arose; court abused discretion finding clear and convincing evidence parenting time safe | Presumption issue mooted by parties’ stipulation in final judgment to residential responsibility and unsupervised parenting time | Waived by stipulation; any interim error waived |
| Interim spousal/child support & expense allocation | Interim order wrongly allocated most household/child expenses to Ashley, award of $500 rehabilitative spousal support insufficient, court erred in delaying and not awarding back child support | Interim order is temporary; final judgment addressed finances; interim findings not clearly erroneous | No abuse of discretion; findings and final judgment adequately addressed finances |
| Award of attorney’s fees under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-29(4) (domestic violence) | Statute mandates perpetrator pay fees; court erred in declining fees to Ashley | Statute not an absolute "blank check"; court may decline if undue hardship or other reasons; trial court discretion | Ashley failed to show the court erred; no award reversed |
| Contempt order (April 2017) & procedural due process | Contempt finding occurred without hearing or show-cause; lacked jurisdiction to sanction | District court entered contempt order; appeal must be timely | Appeal of contempt order dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (notice of appeal untimely) |
| Trial time limit (one-day trial) | One day was insufficient to present witnesses; court abused discretion | Court reasonably scheduled one-day trial; parties knew limit and split time | No abuse of discretion; no showing of prejudice |
| Motion to reopen record and post-trial relief | Court improperly denied reopening and other relief without hearing; fee sanction improper | Motion procedurally deficient (no noticed hearing); court considered briefs and reasonably denied motion; awarded limited fees | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed and $1,000 attorney-fee award upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Tibbetts v. Dornheim, 681 N.W.2d 798 (N.D. 2004) (interlocutory orders merge into final judgment and may be reviewed on appeal from judgment)
- Berg v. Berg, 606 N.W.2d 895 (N.D. 2000) (domestic-violence fees provision does not authorize an absolute, unconditional award of costs)
- Friesner v. Friesner, 921 N.W.2d 898 (N.D. 2019) (spousal support review: findings of fact not overturned unless clearly erroneous; Ruff-Fischer guideline framework)
- Innis-Smith v. Smith, 905 N.W.2d 914 (N.D. 2018) (district court's discretion to reopen the record reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Williams v. Williams, 863 N.W.2d 508 (N.D. 2015) (rehabilitative spousal support purpose and standards)
- Kettle Butte Trucking LLC v. Kelly, 910 N.W.2d 882 (N.D. 2018) (order holding contempt is final for appeal purposes)
- Desert Partners IV, L.P. v. Benson, 855 N.W.2d 608 (N.D. 2014) (appellate jurisdiction and timeliness of notice of appeal are jurisdictional)
- Wilson v. Koppy, 653 N.W.2d 68 (N.D. 2002) (review of denial of waiver of filing fee under abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Northrop v. Northrop, 622 N.W.2d 219 (N.D. 2001) (when parties cohabited before marriage, pre-marital cohabitation may be considered in property division)