Archive | Dissolution (maintenance)

RSS feed for this section

Smith v. Smith

Smith v. Smith, 2015 MT 256 (Sept. 1, 2015) (Rice. J.) (5-0, aff’d & rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in ordering the division of Glenn’s social security benefits; (2) Whether the district court abused its discretion in ordering maintenance to Debora; (3) whether the district court abused its discretion in imposing conditions on the termination of maintenance; (4) whether the district court’s equalization payment was an abuse of discretion; and (5) whether the district court’s award to Debora of the SeaDoo was an abuse of discretion.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) yes, as it made no findings to support her estimated expenses; (3) no; (4) no; and (5) no.

Affirmed and reversed and remanded for further proceedings

Facts: Glenn and Debora live in Polson.…

Marriage of Axelberg

Marriage of Axelberg, 2015 MT 110 (March 11, 2015) (Wheat, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court should have considered the net worth of the marital estate before dividing the property; (2) whether the district court erred in awarding Tracy certain pre-marital and post-separation property; (3) whether the district court abused its discretion by refusing to award maintenance to Delynn; (4) whether the district court erred by retroactively modifying Tracy’s obligations under the interim support agreement; and (5) whether the child support order was clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no; (3) no; (4) no; and (5) no.

Affirmed

Facts: Delynn and Tracy married in 1998 and separated in 2010. Delyn filed for divorce in June 2011.…

Patton v. Patton

Patton v. Patton, 2015 MT 7 (Jan. 13, 2015) (Shea, J.) (5-0, rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court abused its discretion by declining to rule on Gail’s post-trial motions; (2) whether the district court erred in its review of the standing master’s report; and (3) whether the district court abused its discretion by adopting the standing master’s report, which excluded evidence of Bill’s alleged abuse, in determining maintenance.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) yes; and (3) no.

Reversed and remanded

Facts: Gail and Bill married in 1998. When they married, Gail was 43, rented an apartment, drove a used car, and had about $30,000 in the bank. Bill had substantial real and personal property, including the marital home, a veterinary practice, and a working ranch.…