 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Ferrero v. Ferrero6/8/1999
JOHN D. FERRERO v. GINA M. FERRERO
Spousal support/ division of marital property/ medical expenses
JUDGMENT: Modified and affirmed as modified.
The instant appeal emanates from a final judgment of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas. Appellant, John D. Ferrero, seeks the reversal of certain provisions in the final divorce decree which pertain to questions of property distribution and child support . The parties to this action were married for approximately eighteen years and had two children. During the course of the marriage, appellee, Gina M. Ferrero, primarily acted as a homemaker and mother of the children. Although appellee was employed outside the home for the majority of the eighteen years, she only worked part-time. At the Conclusion of the marriage, appellee earned approximately $11,500 per year.
As the primary "breadwinner" for the family, appellant had a private law practice in Stark County, Ohio, and served as the Law Director for the City of Massillon. During the 1990s, appellant was the lead attorney in a number of personal injury cases which resulted in substantial verdicts for his clients. However, because the personal injury cases did not constitute a significant part of his practice, appellant's income as a sole practitioner varied greatly through the years. In addition to the foregoing employment, appellant was involved in local politics and, near the end of the marriage, appellant had become the county chairman of a major political party.
During the course of his mixed practice of law, appellant made contributions to three retirement plans, including the Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio (P.E.R.S.), a deferred compensation plan, and a profit-sharing plan. By the Conclusion of the marriage, the combined worth of the three retirement plans was approximately $160,000. In contrast, appellee's sole retirement plan was worth approximately $20,000. Besides the compensation he earned as an attorney, appellant also received funds from his parents during the marriage. Near the beginning of the marriage in 1980, his parents "gave" the couple $97,000 to purchase a home which they used as their marital residence until the marriage ended. Appellant also received $10,000 annually from his mother during the 1990s.
Appellant usually placed these funds into a separate account and used them to pay both business and family debts. In May 1997, appellant filed a complaint for divorce against appellee alleging that the parties were no longer compatible. In answering the complaint, appellee asserted a counterclaim for divorce, also alleging incompatibility. Before the matter could come to trial, the parties were able to negotiate a plan for shared parenting. In addition to stating that appellee's home would be the children's primary residence for school purposes, the plan set forth a specific list of days in which appellant would have custody of the children.
The plan further stated that appellant was required to provide hospitalization for the children. A two-day bench trial was held on the remaining issues in November 1997. In its subsequent findings of fact and Conclusions of law, the trial court specifically found that appellant's adjusted gross income per year was $125,000; accordingly, the court held that appellant was required to pay child support in the amount of $771 per month for each of the two children.
The trial court also approved the parties' plan for shared parenting, except that the court altered certain provisions concerning visitation and education. As to the marital assets, the trial court concluded that the marital residence should be awarded to appellee, and that appellant should
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|