Susan Fike, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Paul Fike, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.
509 S.W.3d 787
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Paul and Susan Fike married in 1999, have three minor children, and divorced after Wife filed for dissolution in 2013; trial occurred Oct. 2014 and judgment entered June 30, 2015. Appeals by both parties were consolidated.
- Key assets: marital residence (Wife bought pre-marriage, quitclaimed into joint names), mortgage and HELOC on that home, three Fidelity Investment Services (FIS) accounts held in Wife’s name, and a trust (Paul Corrington Fike Trust) for Husband valued ~ $610k.
- Trial court classified the residence and FIS accounts as marital property, awarded the home and loans to Wife (ordering her to refinance and pay Husband 33% of equity), awarded the FIS accounts to Wife, imputed income to Husband (including $1,000/month from trust distributions), ordered Husband to pay maintenance ($1,200/month) and child support, and denied fault-based adjustments.
- Wife was awarded $12,000 in appellate attorney’s fees by the trial court; trial court ordered each party to pay their own trial fees.
- On appeal the court affirmed all aspects of the judgment except it reversed the award of two diamonds (side stones) from Wife’s engagement ring to Husband, holding the ring stones were Wife’s separate property.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wife/Husband abbreviated) | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Valuation timing of assets (home, HELOC, Fidelity accounts) | Paul: trial values were stale; court should hold new hearing close to distribution | Court: trial valuations were reasonably proximate; no evidence values were volatile or changed materially | Affirmed — trial court may use trial-date valuations; no prejudice shown, no new hearing required |
| Classification & division of marital property (marital home, HELOC, FIS accounts) | Paul: division was inequitable; Wife improperly received majority of assets | Wife: home transmuted to marital property when titled jointly; equities (refinance obligation, use of FIS to pay fees) justify distribution | Affirmed — court considered §452.330 factors, awarded home and loans to Wife, 33% equity to Husband, awarded FIS accounts to Wife as equitable under circumstances |
| Income imputation for support (trust distributions & gifts) and maintenance amount | Paul: court wrongly included trust income in imputing earnings and overstated income; Wife argued Husband receives predictable trust distributions | Wife: mother’s gifts to Husband average ~$2,000/month and should be included | Affirmed — court permissibly imputed $1,000/month from trust (and declined to treat mother’s gifts as sufficiently predictable); maintenance award ($1,200/month) supported by findings of incomes and reasonable needs |
| Engagement ring stones; attorney's fees | Wife: engagement ring was gifted to her before marriage and is separate property; Wife sought trial fees too | Husband: stones belonged to his family and he had given ring as a gift (trial awarded two side diamonds to Husband); Husband argued Wife should pay trial fees | Mixed: reversed in part — appellate court held the two diamonds are Wife’s separate property (award to Husband reversed). Trial court’s awards on attorney’s fees (Wife awarded appellate fees; no trial-fee award against Husband) were affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- McCallum v. McCallum, 128 S.W.3d 62 (Mo. App. E.D.) (stale valuation may require new hearing; valuation should be reasonably proximate to distribution)
- Taylor v. Taylor, 736 S.W.2d 388 (Mo. banc) (proper date for valuation is time of trial)
- Kropf v. Jones, 489 S.W.3d 830 (Mo. App. E.D.) (standard of review for dissolution matters; deference to trial court credibility findings)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc) (appellate review standard: affirm if supported by substantial evidence and not against the weight of evidence)
- Keling v. Keling, 155 S.W.3d 830 (Mo. App. E.D.) (spouse may be imputed income if voluntarily underemployed)