368 P.3d 914
Wyo.2016Background
- Husband (retired, brought substantial premarital assets) and Wife (minimal assets, sporadic work) married after she moved into his Florida condo; marriage lasted just over three years.
- Husband purchased Wyoming home before marriage, paid down payment and mortgage; he paid household expenses throughout the marriage.
- Wife alleged Husband promised before marriage that if she moved to Wyoming he would take care of her for life so she need not work.
- Wife filed for divorce; obtained temporary possession of the home and truck and $2,000/month support pending trial.
- Wife moved to amend her complaint (six weeks before trial) to add promissory estoppel based on the alleged premarital promise; the district court denied leave to amend but considered the promise in equitable property division.
- The district court awarded most property to Husband (premarital assets retained by the party who brought them in), gave Wife jewelry and a $45,000 equalization payment; Wife appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court abused discretion by denying leave to amend to add promissory estoppel | Dane argued she was promised lifelong support if she moved, so promissory estoppel claim should be added | Husband argued amendment was untimely, would prejudice him and delay trial; claims could be considered in property division | Denial affirmed: amendment untimely and prejudicial; court properly considered alleged promise in property division without permitting amendment |
| Whether the court abused discretion in the property division | Dane argued the alleged premarital promise and equitable factors warranted a different, more favorable division | Husband argued most assets were premarital and should be awarded to the party who brought them in; Wife made negligible economic contributions | Affirmed: district court’s distribution (awarding premarital assets to Husband, giving Wife jewelry and $45,000) was just and equitable and not shocking to conscience |
Key Cases Cited
- Foxley & Co. v. Ellis, 201 P.3d 425 (Wyo. 2009) (leave to amend is within trial court discretion; undue delay/prejudice justify denial)
- Davis v. Davis, 855 P.2d 342 (Wyo. 1993) (promissory estoppel and limited equitable exceptions to the statute of frauds require showing of unconscionable injury/fraud)
- Kincheloe v. Milatzo, 678 P.2d 855 (Wyo. 1984) (promissory estoppel cannot overcome statute of frauds absent fraudulent misrepresentation)
- Walters v. Walters, 249 P.3d 214 (Wyo. 2011) (an unequal but equitable distribution may be appropriate; review for abuse of discretion)
- Carlton v. Carlton, 997 P.2d 1028 (Wyo. 2000) (affirming that equitable distribution can be unequal)
- Kummerfeld v. Kummerfeld, 309 P.3d 822 (Wyo. 2013) (defer to district court’s factual findings in property division)
- Guy-Thomas v. Thomas, 344 P.3d 782 (Wyo. 2015) (consideration of who brought property to marriage and debts attached is appropriate)
- Bereman v. Bereman, 645 P.2d 1155 (Wyo. 1982) (failure to raise a defense below may result in waiver)