Innes v. Innes

• Decision Date: 14 December 2021
• Docket Number: S-21-0124
• Citation: 2021 WY 137
• Parties: ERIN E. INNES, n/k/a ERIN E. LEMMONS, Appellant (Defendant), v. KYLE E. INNES, Appellee (Plaintiff).
• Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

2021 WY 137

ERIN E. INNES, n/k/a ERIN E. LEMMONS, Appellant (Defendant),
v.
KYLE E. INNES, Appellee (Plaintiff).

No. S-21-0124

Supreme Court of Wyoming

December 14, 2021

Appeal from the District Court of Campbell County The Honorable John R. Perry, Judge

Representing Appellant: M.J. Hall and Toni E. Hartzel of Lance & Hall LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Devon P. O'Connell and Jason A. Matzen of Pence & MacMillan LLC, Laramie, Wyoming.

Before FOX, C.J., and DAVIS, KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, and GRAY, JJ.

1

BOOMGAARDEN, JUSTICE

[¶1] Erin Innes n/k/a Erin Lemmons (Wife) appeals the district court's division of marital property between her and Kyle Innes (Husband) on granting him a divorce. We affirm.

ISSUE

[¶2] We restate the issue:

Did the district court abuse its discretion by dividing the marital property as it did?

FACTS

[¶3] Husband and Wife married in January 2011 and separated approximately seven and a half years later, on or about July 18, 2018, when Husband filed for divorce. They had no children.

[¶4] During their marriage, Husband and Wife primarily lived in Gillette, Wyoming, where they both worked as veterinarians. Husband entered the marriage with more assets than Wife, ^[1] had some education in finance, and thus managed the parties' finances. He frequently moved money between joint and personal accounts, comingling his premarital assets with marital income. He also inherited a substantial amount of money. Whether to share his inheritance with Wife, how to title property purchased with it, and financial transparency became sources of conflict in the marriage.

[¶5] The parties purchased two properties in Gillette between 2011 and 2015. In 2011, they purchased a residential property (the marital residence). Husband paid the down payment from his premarital assets. Both their names were on the title and mortgage. They paid the mortgage from their joint account until Husband closed that account in October 2017 and took over the payments.

[¶6] In 2015, they purchased over 300 acres of rural property (the rural property). Husband paid the down payment from his inheritance and premarital assets. Both their names were on the title and mortgage. Their long-term goal was to build a house, barn, and veterinary hospital on the property. They invested time and money on improvements such as roads, fences, and a well. Husband paid the mortgage from an account in his name.

2

[¶7] The parties started two businesses in 2012. They initially started Cowboy Country Animal Clinic, LLC (CCAC) so Husband could obtain discount medication for his family's ranch. Then, around 2015, he stopped working as a veterinarian at a local clinic and began developing CCAC as a mobile clinic. When Husband proposed removing Wife's name from CCAC's bank account for tax purposes, she objected and they signed an agreement to split CCAC's assets if they divorced.

[¶8] They also started an endurance horse business in which they bought and then Wife trained, raced, and sold the horses with some success. In 2012, they purchased three young horses and sold them for a profit in 2015. Around 2014, they agreed that Wife should devote her veterinarian income to the business. As Wife became more involved in the business, she began spending more time in Texas, where she could more easily train and race the horses during winter. In 2020, they owned three horses and two trailers.

[¶9] In Spring 2018, amid mounting tension over finances, Husband paid for them to attend a marriage retreat in Sedona, Arizona. After the retreat, he suggested they start money management counseling but that never panned out. Husband filed for divorce in July 2018.

[¶10] The district court held a bench trial in December 2020, where Husband and Wife testified. They mainly disagreed about the value of the horses. Husband valued them high based on an October 2017 text message from Wife, but acknowledged she had expertise in the area that he did not. Wife valued them lower because they were older and the market for endurance horses from the United States had evaporated since 2017.

[¶11] In his written closing argument, Husband contended that it was "equitable and just that [he] be given consideration for his premarital funds, for the funds he inherited, and for the significant contributions made during the marriage when [Wife] was not contributing as an...