Giese v. Giese
Robert D. Giese, Plaintiff and Appellant
Eva Giese, Defendant and Appellee
South Central Judicial District,
Judge Donald L. Jorgensen
|Nature of Action:||Divorce/Property Div./Alimony|
|Term:||03/2004  Argument: 03/04/2004 10:45am|
|ND cite:||2004 ND 58|
676 N.W.2d 794
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding Robert in contempt?
2. Whether the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva's claim arising from the payment of retirement benefits to Robert prior to implementation of the Qualified Domestic Relations Order?
3. If the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva's claim, whether the trial court erred by granting her damages without requiring Eva prove she had a viable claim for which relief may be granted?
4. If the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva's claim and she proved her claim, whether the trial court erred in calculating Eva's damages by adding monthly deductions to gross monthly benefits to arrive at Robert's gross monthly retirement benefits?
5. If the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva's claim and she proved her claim, whether the trial court erred in determining her damages by failing to consider the income tax liability issues arising from payment of 100% of the retirement benefits to Robert?
6. If the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva Giese's claim and she proved her claim, whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding attorney fees to Eva?
7. If the trial court had jurisdiction over Eva's claim and she proved her claim, whether the trial court erred by directing that the payment of her damages be paid only from Robert's future retirement benefits?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Was the trial court correct in finding the appellant in contempt?
2. Did the court have jurisdiction to find the appellant in contempt?
3. Did the trial court correctly award the appellee damages as a remedial sanction for the contempt of the appellant?
4. Did the trial court correctly set the amount of damages?
5. Was the trial court within its discretionary limit to set damages without considering the tax liability to the appellant?
6. Did the trial court properly award attorney's fees to the appellee?
7. Should the trial court have allowed the appellant the opportunity to pay his damages from sources other than his future retirement benefits?
8. Should this Court award costs on this appeal as the appeal is frivolous?
|Add Docket 20030278 RSS|
|1||09/24/2003||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 09/22/2003|
|2||09/24/2003||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 09/22/2003|
|3||10/01/2003||RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL: 11/11/2003|
|4||11/10/2003||TRANSCRIPT DATED July 18, 2003|
|5||11/12/2003||DISK - tra (7-18-03)|
|6||11/12/2003||RECORD ON APPEAL (4 vols.) & Exhibits (Not Rec'd: #21 & 29--Notices of Trial)|
|7||11/17/2003||Supplemental Clerk's Certificate dated 11-14-03 (Entry Nos. 21 & 29)|
|8||11/18/2003||Certificate of Service of Copies of Transcript|
|9||12/22/2003||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|10||12/22/2003||ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 12/29/2003|
|13||12/30/2003||DISK - ATB|
|15||01/27/2004||DISK - AEB|
|16||02/12/2004||REPLY BRIEF of Appellant|
|17||02/17/2004||DISK - RYB|
|18||03/04/2004||APPEARANCES: Arnold V. Fleck and Robert D. Giese; Richard B. Baer|
|19||03/04/2004||ARGUED: Fleck; Baer (Vol. Y; Page 210)|
|20||03/04/2004||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|21||03/23/2004||DISPOSITION (and Remanded): AFFIRMED/PT, REVERSED/PT|
|22||03/23/2004||UNANIMOUS OPINION: Maring, Mary Muehlen|
|23||03/23/2004||Costs on appeal taxed in favor of Appellee|
|24||03/25/2004||Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|25||04/15/2004||Supplemental Clerk's Certificate dated 4-14-04 (Entry No. 171)|
|27||04/22/2010||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|28||11/29/2010||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|