Schuh v. Schuh
2014 Ohio 4755
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- 17-year marriage; divorce finalized Dec 19, 2013; child born in 1999; Husband (Ford quality engineer) earnings ~$93,851/year plus bonus; Wife self-employed hair salon owner with net income ~$28,854 and tips not fully tracked; marital property divided and equalized; child support set at $840/month with equal sharing of uncovered medical expenses; spousal support awarded to Wife at $153/month for 12 years with court retaining jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly considered tax consequences under RC 3105.18(C)(1)(l). | Wife contends tax effects were not adequately considered. | Court did consider tax consequences and provided analysis. | Yes; court properly considered tax consequences. |
| Whether $153/month spousal support for 12 years is an abuse of discretion given the marriage length and earnings disparity. | Wife argues the award is too low given long marriage and income gap. | Court weighed factors and concluded amount was appropriate. | No; amount not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ornelas v. Ornelas, 12th Dist. Warren No. CA2011-08-094, 2012-Ohio-4106 (2012-Ohio-4106) (trial court has broad discretion; must consider statutory factors in totality)
- Kunkle v. Kunkle, 51 Ohio St.3d 64, 1990 (1990) (establishes general standard for reviewing spousal-support awards)
- Peters v. Peters, 12th Dist. Warren No. CA2009-04-037, 2009-Ohio-5929 (2009-Ohio-5929) (requires articulation of basis for spousal-support award and indicates not all factors must be discussed individually)
- Gentile v. Gentile, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 97971, 2013-Ohio-1338 (2013-Ohio-1338) (court need only show consideration of statutory factors; not every factor must be discussed)