IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ROBERTS 670 N.E.2d 72 (1996) CASE BRIEF

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ROBERTS

670 N.E.2d 72 (1996)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Leigh Anne (W) appealed from the order that Matthew's (H) law degree was not property subject to distribution pursuant to their divorce.

FACTS: H and W were married on June 24, 1989. In the fall of 1990, H began attending the Valparaiso University Law School as a full-time student. Before law school, H had been earning a salary of $30,000.00 per year. H and W agreed that H should quit working and attend school full-time while W continued to work to support them. W also assumed primary responsibility for running the household so that H could devote all of his time to his studies. Two months before H's graduation Leigh Anne learned that she was pregnant, and thereafter the couple separated. H filed his petition for dissolution of marriage on August 4, 1993. The assets were the marital home, valued at $70,000.00 with a mortgage of $63,245.00. The parties also owned certain personal property and each had 401(k) accounts and IRA accounts. The court determined that H's law degree could not be considered a marital asset subject to distribution. However, the court did include H's student loans, totaling $22,500.00, in valuing the marital estate, and the court found repayment to be the sole responsibility of H. The court determined that, based upon the student loans, the disproportionate earnings history and the earning potential of the parties, the presumption of equal distribution had been rebutted. H was left with $2,415.04 in debt and W got $25,534.98. W appealed contending that the law degree was property.

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