Skachenko v. Skachenko
Docket Info
- Title
- Kathryn Skachenko, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Roger D. Skachenko, Defendant and Appellant - Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : DIVORCE/PROPERTY DIV./ALIMONY
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 10-C-02717
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Gail Hagerty
Highlight
A district court does not abuse its discretion when it denies a party's motion to use frozen marital funds to conduct a business evaluation when the moving party has access to non-frozen, separate funds and has not addressed why the non-frozen, separate funds cannot be used.
A district court does not abuse its discretion when it denies a post-trial motion to include, as a separate asset of the marital estate, a loan owed by a party's business to the party when the loan was not included on the property and debt listing filed with the court and was not at issue prior to or during trial.
A district court has discretion to award attorney fees as a sanction for misconduct during litigation and must make findings regarding culpability of the party against whom sanctions are being imposed, prejudice against the moving party, and the availability of less severe alternative sanctions.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 12/23/2011 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 12/21/2011 | |
2 | 12/23/2011 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 12/21/2011 | |
3 | 12/23/2011 | ANNOUNCED DISQUALIFICATION : Sandstrom, Dale V. | |
4 | 12/23/2011 | ACKNOWLEGMENT OF ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT & REQUEST FOR RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL : 02/09/2012 | |
5 | 01/23/2012 | Electronic RECORD ON APPEAL dated 1-20-12 (Entry Nos. 1-84) | |
6 | 02/03/2012 | TRANSCRIPT DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2011, & C.O.S. | |
7 | 02/03/2012 | DISK-tra (11/8/11) e-mailed | |
8 | 02/15/2012 | Transcript dated 5-5-11 & C.O.S. | |
9 | 02/15/2012 | DISK - tra (5/5/11) (e-mailed) | |
10 | 03/02/2012 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
11 | 03/02/2012 | E-FILED BRIEF | |
12 | 03/02/2012 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | |
13 | 03/02/2012 | E-FILED APPENDIX | |
14 | 03/05/2012 | Received $25 surcharge for ATB (Receipt #20900) | |
15 | 03/07/2012 | Received $63.50 surcharge for ATA (Receipt #20907) | |
16 | 03/09/2012 | Received 7 copies of ATB from CSD | |
17 | 03/09/2012 | Rec'd 6 copies of ATA from CSD | |
18 | 03/29/2012 | MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF | |
19 | 03/29/2012 | E-FILED MOTION | |
20 | 03/29/2012 | ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK - Granted : 04/13/2012 | |
21 | 04/12/2012 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
22 | 04/13/2012 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
23 | 04/13/2012 | APPELLEE APPENDIX | |
24 | 04/13/2012 | DISK - aeb (e-mailed) | |
25 | 04/19/2012 | SITTING WITH THE COURT : Schmalenberger, Allan L. | |
26 | 05/14/2012 | APPEARANCES: Benjamin C. Pulkrabek; Brenda A. Neubauer | |
27 | 05/14/2012 | ARGUED: Benjamin C. Pulkrabek; Brenda A. Neubauer | |
28 | 05/14/2012 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
29 | 06/12/2012 | DISPOSITION | |
30 | 06/12/2012 | UNANIMOUS OPINION : Kapsner, Carol Ronning | View |
31 | 06/12/2012 | Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee | |
32 | 06/12/2012 | Judgment Sent to Parties | |
33 | 07/05/2012 | MANDATE | |
34 | 07/09/2012 | RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE | |
35 | 08/05/2021 | EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed |