GELDMEIER V. GELDMEIER 669 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. App. 1984) CASE BRIEF

GELDMEIER V. GELDMEIER

669 S.W.2d 33 (Mo. App. 1984)

NATURE OF THE CASE: H disputed the trial courts division of marital property and order to pay child support.

FACTS: H and W married in 1963. Their two children, Mark and Kelly, were born in 1964 and 1968. H was the principal breadwinner. His gross income during 1981 was $36,465.00, which included substantial overtime. W was primarily a homemaker, although she had worked as a secretary at one point during the marriage. W had completed her master's degree in clinical psychology shortly before the parties' dissolution. Although she was seeking employment in both her chosen profession and other fields, her job search had not proven fruitful at the time of trial. The court divided the marital property and awarded W custody of the two children and support of $80.00 per week, per child. Maintenance was set at $100.00 per month. The marital home, valued at approximately $40,000.00, was the major asset and was encumbered by two separate notes, secured by deeds of trust, for $16,400.00 and $15,000.00. ($16,400.00 was the amount still owed on the parties original home mortgage; the latter $15,000 was borrowed to pay marital debts). The court awarded the marital home to wife, who had custody of the minor children. In turn, the court ordered W to execute a note and deed of trust in favor of H in the amount of Seven Thousand Five Hundred ($7500.00) Dollars, with no interest, payable on the earliest happening of one of the following events: (1) The emancipation of the minor child, Kelly Ann Geldmeier. (2) The marriage of petitioner. (3) The sale of the house by petitioner. W got the 1973 Cutlass automobile, valued at $800.00; household furniture worth $500.00 and personal property in her possession. H received, in addition to his interest in the marital home, a 1974 Chevelle automobile, valued at $450.00; a $500.00 boat; his interest in the Anheuser-Busch pension plan, worth approximately $2,000.00 and including insurance plans connected with the plan; his $1100.00 interest in a life insurance policy, with directions that the children be named as beneficiaries until their emancipation; $2,500.00 from the recent sale of stock, and the remaining value of his Anheuser-Busch stock fund, worth approximately $3,000.00. W was to pay the debt to her parents; H to pay the debt to his parents. W was ordered to pay the first note for $16,400.00, secured by a deed of trust, and H the second note of $15,000.00. H was responsible for signature and student loans totaling approximately $6,500.00, for which payments are withheld from his weekly salary. H was also ordered to discharge all other debts, which amounted to $600.00. H contends that the court 'divided the marital property and debts in such a disproportionate manner that the effect of the division of the property was to award property to wife while awarding more debts than property to the husband.'

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner