 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Marriage of Hoyle12/13/2000
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Greene County County, Joel E. Swanson, Judge.
On appeal from the entry of parties' dissolution decree, Stephen argues the district court erred in valuing the premarital property and in omitting the value of farmland he owned prior to the marriage.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
Stephen and Sheryl Hoyle complain the decree dissolving their marriage is not "according to Hoyle" on over a dozen issues. We affirm as modified.
I. Background.
Stephen and Sheryl Hoyle's nineteen-year marriage was dissolved in 1999. They have four children: Joshua (June 23, 1981), Adrian (May 12, 1983), Ashley (July 9, 1986), and Jordan (January 18, 1991). Joshua has reached the age of majority.
Stephen appeals the district court's dissolution decree and Sheryl cross-appeals. They both challenge the decree's various property and support provisions. We affirm as modified below.
II. The Merits.
In an equity action our review is de novo. In re Marriage of Brauer, 511 N.W.2d 645, 646 (Iowa App. 1993). We have a duty to examine the entire record and adjudicate anew the issues properly presented. Id. We give weight to the fact findings of the trial court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but are not bound by those findings. Id.
A. Premarital Property.
Stephen and Sheryl both contest the district court's finding Stephen had $142,500 of premarital assets not subject to division: Stephen argues the appropriate figure is $333,331 while Sheryl argues it is $50,000. The amount of property a party brings into a marriage is one of several factors to consider in making an equitable division of property. Iowa Code § 598.21(1)(b); In re Marriage of Miller, 552 N.W.2d 460, 465 (Iowa App. 1996). A court is not required to set aside such property, but may do so given the particular circumstances of a case. Miller, 552 N.W.2d at 465.
The circumstances of this case warrant setting aside $142,500 for Stephen. When the parties married in 1980 Stephen owned a twenty-five-percent interest in Hoyle Trucking, Inc., a fourteen-percent interest in Hoyle Farms, Inc., and an undivided twenty-five-percent interest in 400 acres of farmland. Despite Stephen's assertions to the contrary, the record—which contains a jumble of conflicting financial statements, purchase agreements, real estate contracts, tax returns, and the like—does not show, with any certainty, the true value of these assets at the time of the parties' marriage. Nor does the record show what happened to these assets throughout the parties' marriage. The record does show that by 1999 Stephen owned a sixty-six-percent interest in Hoyle Trucking and a five-eighths undivided interest in 160 acres of unencumbered farmland that together were worth roughly $593,300. Stephen's premarital assets were the cornerstone of this wealth and, accordingly, he should be allowed to retain a portion of it. See Miller, 552 N.W.2d at 465. Sheryl, on the other hand, did not bring any assets to the parties' marriage, but her contributions as wife and mother for nineteen years cannot be overlooked. See id.; see also Iowa Code § 598.21(1)(c). Because it would be inequitable to set aside more than $142,500 for Stephen, we affirm the district court.
B. Value of Hoyle Trucking, Inc.
Stephen challenges the district court's valuation of Hoyle Trucking, Inc. He asserts his two-thirds interest in the corporation at the time of trial was worth $248,500. The court, relying heavily on Sheryl's figures, found Stephen's interest was worth $373,333. The record suggests Sheryl may not have allowed for depreciation
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|