Teasha J. Harris v. Anthony J. Harris (mem. dec.), 49A02-1606-DR-1218

Husband and Wife married in 1995; one child (born 1996). Wife moved to Indiana in 2005 and filed for dissolution in 2008.
A 2009 dissolution decree awarded custody, child support, spousal maintenance, and divided assets; Husband appealed for lack of personal jurisdiction. Harris I reversed portions for lack of in personam jurisdiction.
The parties later submitted an agreed 2011 entry on custody/support; appellate court in Harris II held Husband had consented to jurisdiction as to remaining issues and remanded for equitable distribution and maintenance.
Wife alleged disability from a 2007 car accident, receives $719/month SSDI and a $40,000+ personal injury settlement; Husband is retired military and 100% disabled. Wife lives rent-free in her father’s home.
Trial court (March 8, 2016) denied Wife’s maintenance claim, awarded each party the personal property in their possession at the time of the original dissolution, and ordered Husband to pay $5,000 of Wife’s attorney fees (Wife owed ~ $48,000 more). Wife appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Wife)	Defendant's Argument (Husband)	Held
Spousal maintenance — whether Wife is entitled to maintenance	Wife: her disability materially impairs her ability to be self-supporting and warrants maintenance	Husband: evidence of disability is weak; Wife has SSDI, settlement funds, ability to do some work, and lives rent-free	Court: Denied — trial court’s credibility and findings supported; no clear error in finding Wife failed to prove entitlement
Division of marital assets — whether division was inequitable or improperly considered Wife’s PI settlement	Wife: trial court failed to equitably divide marital property and improperly factored her PI settlement into distribution	Husband: parties produced poor valuation evidence; trial court’s valuations (favoring Husband’s estimates) were within evidence; PI settlement not used to adjust distribution	Court: Affirmed — trial court reasonably valued property, an equal division presumptively just, and did not improperly rely on PI settlement
Attorney fees — whether trial court abused discretion by awarding only $5,000 to Wife	Wife: Husband is more financially able and should pay full or substantially more of her fees	Husband: parties’ financial resources and earning abilities are roughly equal; no misconduct by either party justifying larger award	Court: Affirmed — limited fee award was within trial court’s discretion after considering resources and circumstances

Harris v. Harris, 922 N.E.2d 626 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (in rem dissolution can proceed without personal jurisdiction over absent spouse; in personam jurisdiction required for incidents of marriage)
Harris v. Harris, 31 N.E.3d 991 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (prior jurisdictional ruling did not preclude later submission to court’s jurisdiction; remand for equitable distribution and maintenance)
Bizik v. Bizik, 753 N.E.2d 762 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (trial court has broad discretion in awarding spousal maintenance)
Matzat v. Matzat, 854 N.E.2d 918 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (maintenance inquiry centers on ability to support oneself)
Alexander v. Alexander, 980 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (denial of maintenance upheld where evidence of disability existed but trial court found ability to do some work)
Cannon v. Cannon, 758 N.E.2d 524 (Ind. 2001) (trial court’s findings on disability and self-support may justify denying maintenance)
Crider v. Crider, 26 N.E.3d 1045 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (property division is reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Balicki v. Balicki, 837 N.E.2d 532 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (trial court’s valuation within evidence range is not an abuse of discretion)
Ahls v. Ahls, 52 N.E.3d 797 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (trial court may award attorney fees after considering parties’ resources and other factors)
Troyer v. Troyer, 987 N.E.2d 1130 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (fee awards appropriate when one party is in superior position to pay)