Hollon v. Hollon, 80-SC-784-DG
| Decision Date | 24 November 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 80-SC-784-DG,80-SC-784-DG |
| Citation | 623 S.W.2d 898 |
| Parties | Ovia James HOLLON, Movant, v. Thelma Watkins HOLLON, Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
John C. Anggelis, Lexington, for movant.
Thomas J. Roberts, Middlesboro, for respondent.
This is an appeal from a Breathitt Circuit Court decree which entered a dissolution of marriage, awarded maintenance, and divided the property of the parties. The movant, Ovia James Hollon, contends that both the property division and maintenance award were unsupported by the findings of fact and should be reversed. The respondent, Thelma Watkins Hollon, argues by cross-appeal that the maintenance award was just, but the property division was inequitable and requires a remand. The Court of Appeals, --- S.W.2d ----, found sufficient facts in the record to support the trial court's decree and affirmed. We reverse.
Both parties complain of the perfunctory manner in which the trial judge made his findings of fact and disposed of the marital property. Despite their dissatisfaction, neither party, by motion or written request, asked the trial judge for more definite findings. Ordinarily a party's failure to bring this matter to the trial court's attention would prevent this court from giving relief under CR 52.04. However, CR 1 has defined the scope of the Civil Rules and states:
(2) These Rules govern procedures and practice in all actions of a civil nature in the Court of Justice except for statutory proceedings, in which the procedural requirements of the statute shall prevail over any inconsistent procedures set forth in the Rules.
KRS 403.130(1) complements CR 1 by making the Civil Rules applicable to all divorce proceedings "except as otherwise provided in this chapter." Thus, the failure of the parties to request complete findings of fact is not fatal to their appeals because the trial judge did not comply with the procedural requirements of this statutory proceeding.
The trial judge's only reference in his findings of fact to the parties' property was the bare statement:
4. The Court finds that they have accumulated certain property which is hereinafter divided.
No mention of the property division or maintenance award was made in the trial judge's conclusions of law. Although the judgment described the property to be divided and its recipient, only a portion of the marital property was valued. We think KRS 403.190 requires the trial judge to do more when distributing marital property. The statute clearly requires that non-marital property be separated and marital property divided in "just proportions" after considering all factors, including those enumerated in the statute. The trial judge also must find the facts and state them specifically in accordance with CR 52.01. When the statute and rule are not complied with, it is inappropriate for this court to search the record and to make findings which the trial judge was required to do.
Because a maintenance award is dependent, in part, on the amount of property owned by the needy spouse, the maintenance award must be vacated pending compliance with the property distribution statute. Moreover, we do not think that the trial judge adequately complied with the standards for awarding maintenance found in KRS 403.200. The statute requires that certain factors be considered when determining whether maintenance should be granted and, if it is granted, in what amount and for what duration. The trial judge, in his findings of fact, merely stated that the wife presently was unable to work and the husband was working. Like the trial court's property distribution decree, the findings of fact are not complete and specific enough to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Green v. Commissioner, Docket No. 20146-84
...under sec. 71, after considering all the facts and circumstances. 746 F.2d at 322-323. 10 In her brief, Shirley cited Hollon v. Hollon, 623 S.W.2d 898 (Ky. 1981), where the divorce decree contained findings of fact insufficient to comply with the Kentucky maintenance award statute (Ky. Rev.......
-
Jones v. Jones
...of maintenance may only be made after nonmarital property is assigned and marital property is divided between the parties. Hollon v. Hollon, 623 S.W.2d 898 (Ky.1981). As entitlement and amount of maintenance are dependent upon the marital and nonmarital property allocated to the party, it i......
-
Ealy v. Ealy
...was not employable due to her medical condition. Jack failed to rebut this finding. SUFFICIENT FINDINGS OF FACT Jack cites Hollon v. Hollon, Ky., 623 S.W.2d 898 (1981), and argues that a trial court must set forth findings of fact to support its decision regarding the division of marital pr......
-
Wood v. Wood, No. 2006-CA-001758-MR (Ky. App. 3/6/2009), 2006-CA-001758-MR.
...to any award, or our review of any award, of maintenance. See, e.g., Dotson v. Dotson, 864 S.W.2d 900 (Ky. 1993); Hollon v. Hollon, 623 S.W.2d 898 (Ky. 1981); Cochran v. Cochran, 746 S.W.2d 568 (Ky.App. 1988). Clearly, Paige's ability to generate income was temporarily limited by her pursui......