HOLMAN V. HOLMAN 228 S.W.3d 628 (2007) CASE BRIEF

HOLMAN V. HOLMAN

228 S.W.3d 628 (2007)

NATURE OF THE CASE: William Holman (H) appeals the trial court's judgment dissolving his marriage to LaVonne Carol Holman (W) disputing the trial court's determination that W acquired marital interests in the increased value of real property titled solely in H's name together with the trial court's division of these marital interests. H also challenges the trial court's determination that the antenuptial agreement entered into by the parties was unconscionable and, thus, unenforceable.

FACTS: At the time of marriage, H owned a farmhouse on thirty acres, but was not living at that location because his ex-wife resided there. The former wife vacated the Farmhouse in May of 1992. H and W began remodeling it. Proceeds from the sale of their marital house were used by the parties to remodel the farmhouse. They spent $90,000.00 remodeling the Farmhouse. The Farmhouse was valued at $54,640.00 when the parties began remodeling. It was appraised at the time of trial for $185,000.00. W valued the marital interest in the Farmhouse at $130,360.00. W and H also borrowed $75,000.00 to construct a commercial building on real property H inherited during the course of the marriage when his father passed away in 1997. H made all of the payments on the loan for the Commercial Building out of their joint account. The value of the 'bare land' was $30,000.00. They spent $62,000.00 on the Commercial Building together with $5,600.00 constructing a parking lot adjacent to it. They received rental income from the Commercial Building and that she opened a business in the newly constructed Commercial Building. W purchased fixtures for her business with $15,000.00 of her own money and the fixtures were then sold with the business. Wife also testified she placed the money she received from selling the business into her separate account to pay for her 'living expenses' and 'personal needs.' The Commercial Building and Commercial Property were appraised shortly before trial at $127,000.00. W claimed the marital interest in the Commercial Building and Commercial Property was $97,000.00. The trial court found that W had acquired a marital interest 'in real property titled in H's name. It found W's nonmarital property to be valued at $89,223.00 and valued H's nonmarital property at $624,799.00. It found there was an unequal division of marital property, such that W was entitled to a judgment against Husband in the amount of $203,832.67 to equalize the distribution of marital property. H appealed.

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