A man recently appealed a trial court’s findings in the divorce proceedings between him and his ex-wife. At trial, the court had awarded the wife a lump sum for the value of the couple’s home as well as the value of attorney’s fees. On appeal, the husband argued both of these values were unreasonably high. The court disagreed, sustaining the original verdict.
Facts of the Case
According to the opinion, the wife filed a petition for divorce after having been married to her husband for ten years. After the filing, the husband and wife significantly disagreed on two issues: distribution of money for the value of the couple’s house and the awarding of attorney’s fees.
During the couple’s marriage, the monthly mortgage payments were divided equally between the parties. At trial, the wife’s attorney emphasized that she had been the person contributing financially to the improvement of the property, doing the grocery shopping, and taking care of the couple’s children the majority of the time. The husband, on the other hand, had “made negative nonmonetary contributions” to the home by hoarding and diminishing the value of the residence. The court used this evidence, along with the mortgage balance on the house, to determine that the husband owed the wife approximately $38,000 for the value of this asset.