928 N.W.2d 458
S.D.2019Background
- Bruce and Kathleen Taylor divorced after a long marriage (married 1987); marital estate exceeded $1,000,000 including home, retirement, and business (Taylor Made Homes). Both were age 54 at trial; Kathleen earned substantially more than Bruce at trial.
- Bruce separated from the marital home in 2014, had an extramarital relationship, received $100,000 life insurance proceeds, and paid some but not all interim support; Kathleen sought discovery, valuations (business and personal property), interim support, and contempt remedies for Bruce's noncompliance.
- Bruce repeatedly failed to comply with discovery and court orders, provided tax returns and appraisals only near trial, and purchased assets post-separation; the court found him in contempt for willful noncompliance.
- Trial court awarded Kathleen a larger share of the marital estate (net values: Kathleen ~$661,666; Bruce ~$463,957), recalculated child support, upheld interim orders through July 31, 2016, ordered $1,000/month spousal support for five years, and awarded attorney fees to Kathleen without specifying amount.
- On appeal Bruce challenged property valuation/division, support awards (interim and post-trial), contempt findings, and attorney-fee award; Supreme Court affirmed property division, child support, contempt findings, and interim support through July 31, 2016, but reversed the ongoing spousal award and the unspecified attorney-fee award and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bruce) | Defendant's Argument (Kathleen) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Property division — valuations & overall equity | Court misvalued home, business, and liabilities causing inequitable split; Bruce should receive credit for $100,000 life-insurance proceeds | Court acted within discretion given conflicting valuations and Bruce's failure to comply with discovery; Kathleen's valuations were supported | Affirmed: court's valuations and overall division not an abuse; court permissibly considered Bruce's noncompliance and loss of credibility |
| Interim and post-trial spousal support | Interim $3,000 order lacked evidentiary basis and should have been terminated when Bruce moved to reconsider; post-trial $1,000/mo for five years improper because Kathleen withdrew the request/no proof of need | Interim support was justified by available record and Kathleen's emergency showing; post-trial support appropriate given factors | Partial reversal: interim support upheld through July 31, 2016; court abused discretion in awarding ongoing five-year spousal support and failed to reconsider interim order thereafter — remand to terminate after July 31, 2016 and recalculate back spousal support |
| Contempt findings for noncompliance | Bruce lacked ability to comply (health, limited income); contempt findings were erroneous | Bruce failed to carry burden to prove inability; evidence showed large purchases and inadequate accounting including life-insurance proceeds | Affirmed: contempt findings not clearly erroneous; Bruce failed to prove inability to comply and willful noncompliance supported by record |
| Attorney fees awarded to Kathleen | Award improper because Kathleen did not submit itemized fees and court made no findings on reasonableness; court also failed to credit Bruce for fees he paid | Fees warranted because Bruce's noncompliance forced litigation; court permissibly awarded fees based on contempt | Reversed and remanded: fee award vacated because no itemization or factual findings; remand requires itemized fees and two-step analysis (reasonableness and parties' relative circumstances) |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. Hill, 763 N.W.2d 818 (S.D. 2009) (standard for review of support and property division)
- Novak v. Novak, 713 N.W.2d 551 (S.D. 2006) (factors for equitable division of marital property)
- Larson v. Larson, 733 N.W.2d 272 (S.D. 2007) (valuation evidence and "hard evidence" discussion)
- Richarz v. Richarz, 904 N.W.2d 76 (S.D. 2017) (valuation timing and case-by-case valuation determinations)
- Green v. Green, 922 N.W.2d 283 (S.D. 2019) (crediting spouse for debts incurred after separation caused by other's failure to pay)
- Midzak v. Midzak, 697 N.W.2d 733 (S.D. 2005) ("all property" approach to marital assets)
- Terca v. Terca, 757 N.W.2d 319 (S.D. 2008) (inheritances not automatically excluded from marital estate)
- Kolbach v. Kolbach, 877 N.W.2d 822 (S.D. 2016) (burden to show need for alimony and to make findings on economic circumstances)
- Streier v. Pike, 886 N.W.2d 573 (S.D. 2016) (two-step attorney-fee analysis and need for findings)
- Dooley v. Dooley, 601 N.W.2d 277 (S.D. 1999) (necessity of itemized fee statements to review reasonableness)
- Muenster v. Muenster, 764 N.W.2d 712 (S.D. 2009) (standard and proof for contempt and burden when claiming inability to comply)
- Sazama v. State ex rel. Muilenberg, 729 N.W.2d 335 (S.D. 2007) (purpose and elements of civil contempt)