Sauer v. Sauer
400 P.3d 1204
Utah Ct. App.2017Background
- Paul and Pauline Sauer married in 1987, separated in 2004, and Paul filed for divorce in 2013; the bench trial court issued a divorce decree in November 2015.
- Court awarded Pauline half of Paul’s retirement benefits and $576/month alimony; it ordered Pauline to reimburse Paul about $1,438 for moving/utility expenses.
- Paul sought recovery for various missing personal-property items (with his own valuations) and claimed a truck had been sold by Pauline. Pauline denied losing items and offered no competing valuations.
- The trial court rejected Paul’s valuations and found his testimony not credible, in part because Paul had voluntarily stored property at others’ homes and never reported losses to police.
- The trial court also rejected Pauline’s reported low income and housing expense as not credible, imputed monthly income ($1,517) and housing needs ($975) to her, and used those imputed figures in fashioning alimony.
- Paul appealed, arguing the court abused discretion in (1) weighing evidence/valuation, (2) imputing Pauline’s needs contrary to Dahl, and (3) making findings unsupported by evidence. The appeals court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Paul) | Defendant's Argument (Pauline / Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility and valuation of missing property | Paul: Presented uncontested evidence of item values; court erred in rejecting it | Court: Paul’s valuations lacked foundation and credibility; he failed to prove Pauline caused losses | Affirmed — trial court may disbelieve uncontradicted testimony; rejection of causation made valuation dispute immaterial |
| Imputation of Pauline’s income and housing needs for alimony | Paul: Dahl permits imputation only when there is no evidence; Pauline provided evidence so imputation was improper | Court: Pauline’s reported figures were not credible or relevant to reasonable future needs; imputation permitted where credible evidence is lacking | Affirmed — imputation appropriate when no credible, relevant evidence supports claimed figures (consistent with Dahl) |
| Findings alleged unsupported by evidence (e.g., Paul was sole income source; Pauline had no access to funds) | Paul: Court’s findings were "patently false" and unsupported by testimony | Court: Appellant failed to cite record; credibility determinations lie with trial court | Affirmed — appellant failed to show clear error; appellate deference to trial court factfinding and credibility determinations |
Key Cases Cited
- Morris v. Farmers Home Mut. Ins. Co., 500 P.2d 505 (Utah 1972) (preponderance is the civil standard of proof)
- State v. Calliham, 57 P.3d 220 (Utah 2002) (trial court credibility determinations entitled to deference)
- Hale v. Big H Constr., Inc., 288 P.3d 1046 (Utah Ct. App. 2012) (bench-trial findings not set aside unless clearly erroneous)
- Anderson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 583 P.2d 101 (Utah 1978) (unchallenged party testimony is not conclusive; weight and credibility are for factfinder)
- Fullmer v. Fullmer, 347 P.3d 14 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (weight given to witness and expert testimony is within factfinder’s province)