Henderson v. Henderson, 80-433

Decision Date16 September 1981
Docket NumberNo. 80-433,80-433
Citation435 A.2d 133,121 N.H. 807
PartiesJoanne B. HENDERSON v. Douglas W. HENDERSON.
CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court

Kalil & Reams, Northwood (Earl L. Kalil, Jr., on the brief and orally), for plaintiff.

Burns, Bryant, Hinchey, Cox & Shea, Dover (Stephen E. Gaige, Dover, on the brief and orally), for defendant.

KING, Chief Justice.

This is a libel for divorce brought by the plaintiff, Joanne B. Henderson, against the defendant, Douglas W. Henderson. After a trial before a marital master, the superior court approved the master's recommendations for a decree of divorce and property settlement. After the trial, the defendant moved to set aside the verdict, and the motion was denied. The defendant appeals those portions of the order dealing with the property settlement.

The parties were married in September, 1971, in Strafford, New Hampshire, after which the defendant worked for several months for the telephone company and then for five or six months in a box factory in Dover, New Hampshire. In 1972, the parties moved to Wakefield, Massachusetts, where the defendant worked in a real estate firm, without must success. In 1973, the parties moved to Strafford, New Hampshire, where the plaintiff's parents owned a large parcel of property.

The plaintiff's mother, Cora Snow, operated a summer riding camp for girls in addition to a winter snowmobile lodge on her property. Both the plaintiff and the defendant worked at these activities, and Mrs. Snow provided them with room and board, a vehicle, and approximately $100 per month, and also paid many of their personal expenses. In 1975, the parties became totally responsible for the operation of the camp and trail rides, with the understanding that they would eventually purchase the camp from Mrs. Snow.

In 1976, the parties acquired from Mrs. Snow as joint tenants seventy-nine acres of real property for $20,000, the amount of the then outstanding mortgage. Mrs. Snow let the parties use her horses, saddles and horse equipment, and all of her household furniture at no expense to them. In addition, Mrs. Snow loaned money to them, paid the taxes and insurance on the property, and paid the expenses of maintaining the animals. Mrs. Snow also gave them various items of heavy equipment and a vehicle associated with the operation of the camp.

During the next two years, the parties, concluding that the camp was an unprofitable venture, began to operate a public boarding and training stable. This latter endeavor was also unsuccessful, and, in 1978, the parties listed the property for sale at $180,000. Having received no offers for the property at that price, the parties began selling smaller parcels of the land in the hope of reducing the size of the horse farm to one that would increase its marketability.

The first sale of twenty-six acres realized $13,000; the next sale of five acres realized $10,000; the third and final sale of eleven acres realized $18,500 for a total of $41,500. After disposing of these various parcels of land, the remaining property was offered for sale, the parties rejected one offer of $85,000.

When these parcels of land were sold, the bank holding the mortgage demanded that $4,000 be paid toward the principal of the mortgage on the property. The remaining proceeds went toward living expenses and improvement of the property. Much of the proceeds went to purchase a dump truck, a skidder, and a wood-splitter to be used by the defendant in a logging business that he began in 1979.

The various business enterprises of the parties all have been either unsuccessful or only marginally profitable. Furthermore, neither party has held outside employment since 1972. During the last several years, prior to the divorce, the parties never made enough money to pay any federal income tax.

In 1980, the marriage disintegrated, and the plaintiff filed for divorce. A hearing was held on August 14, 1980. The Marital Master (Earl J. Dearborn, Esq.) recommended a decree, and the Superior Court (Contas, J.) approved the master's recommendation.

The decree granted the plaintiff a divorce on the grounds that irreconcilable differences had caused the irremedial breakdown of the marriage. The decree granted the plaintiff the marital residence in Strafford and the household furnishings, subject to any encumbrances, an automobile, a nine- horse van, the flat-bed trailer, any horse equipment on the premises not the property of Mrs. Snow, and one of the parties' two ponies. The decree also provided that the plaintiff would assume and pay the mortgage and any tax bills on the real estate, the outstanding bills to various department stores, the oil bill, and one-half of the parties' charge account. The defendant was awarded the dump truck,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Croteau v. Croteau
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • December 8, 1998
    ...specifically in contention, especially where either party reasonably and seasonably moves for clarification." Henderson v. Henderson , 121 N.H. 807, 810, 435 A.2d 133, 135 (1981).Reversed.BRODERICK, J., concurred specially; JOHNSON, J., dissented; the others concurred.BRODERICK, J., concurr......
  • Estate of Croteau v. Croteau, 96-544
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • December 8, 1998
    ...is specifically in contention, especially where either party reasonably and seasonably moves for clarification." Henderson v. Henderson, 121 N.H. 807, 810, 435 A.2d 133, 135 Reversed. BRODERICK, J., concurred specially; JOHNSON, J., dissented; the others concurred. BRODERICK, J., concurring......
  • Hodgins v. Hodgins
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • July 1, 1985
    ...before the marriage, Grandmaison supra, or its recent acquisition through one party's family relationship, Henderson v. Henderson, 121 N.H. 807, 810, 435 A.2d 133, 135 (1981); the parties' relative ability to support themselves, Buckner v. Buckner, 120 N.H. 402, 404-05, 415 A.2d 871, 873 (1......
  • Ruben v. Ruben, 82-344
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1983
    ...of alimony, and we will not disturb such findings absent a showing of abuse of discretion or error of law. Henderson v. Henderson, 121 N.H. 807, 809, 435 A.2d 133, 135 (1981); see Rahn v. Rahn, 123 N.H. 222, ---, 459 A.2d 268, 269 (1983). In allocating property the court must consider the t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT