|
10:45am | Tuesday, December 4, 2007 |
|
| 20070196 |
Shirley Krueger, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Albert Krueger, Defendant and Appellant
|
| Appeal from: |
South Central Judicial District,
Judge Sonna M. Anderson |
|
Nature of Action: |
Divorce/Property Div./Alimony |
| Counsel: |
|
| Issues: | Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
I. Should the court have allowed permanent alimony in the amount of $1,500.00 per month for (10) ten years and $1,000.00 per month thereafter?
1. Unfairness of result
2. That the income does not support such a result.
3. In the property settlement most of the debt went to Albert.
4. Resulting in serious cash flow problem.
II. The the court should have taken into account the debts for purchasing farm equipment from the estate in determining the split instead of assessing them to Albert and not counting them in the split even though the equipment purchased is part of
the equipment which must be split and sold with both receiving one half of the proceeds?Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I.The trial court did not err when it awarded Shirley permanent spousal support.
A.The trial court correctly awarded Shirley permanent rather than rehabilitative spousal support.
B.Albert's substantial income from his three tax offices supports the trial court's award to Shirley of $1,500 for ten years and $1,000 per month thereafter.
C.Albert can earn substantial income from his life estate interest and future fee simple interest in 918 acres from his parents' estate, from which Shirley received no portion in the trial court's order for judgment.
II.The trial court did not err in its asset and debt distribution.
A.The trial court properly took into account all of Albert's estate-related assets and debts and assigned them to Albert, and awarded Shirley neither estate assets nor its debts.
B.The trial court awarded all estate assets and debts to Albert, in part because of its skepticism that Albert had not managed his parents' trust assets properly.
C.The trial court's division of farm assets will not hinder Albert's continued ability to make a living and pay spousal support.
|
| Briefs: |
|
Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 12/31/2007 |