Jones v. Jones
| Decision Date | 25 April 1984 |
| Citation | 454 So.2d 1006 |
| Parties | Tobye M. JONES v. Keith S. JONES. Civ. 4099. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Harold H. Goings of Corley, Moncus, Bynum & De Buys, Birmingham, for appellant.
R. Wayne Wolfe, Huntsville, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a divorce decree.
Tobye M. Jones and Keith S. Jones were married on June 1, 1975 and divorced on October 21, 1983. The divorce decree provided that, in addition to paying $250 per month in child support, Mr. Jones should pay various debts owed by his former wife, Mrs. Jones, repay Mrs. Jones' mother, Gladys Moncus, for various debts owed to her, and maintain medical insurance on the couple's minor child, Hunter McCain Jones. Mrs. Jones was given custody of the child, title to the couple's home and automobile, and extensive personal property, including furnishings and appliances. Mrs. Jones appeals, asserting that the trial court erred in: (1) failing to order Mr. Jones to repay her for money spent for his support and educational expenses while he was in undergraduate and law school, (2) failing to consider Mr. Jones' law degree and admittance to the bar as an asset of the marriage when dividing marital property and/or determining an amount of alimony, (3) failing to provide adequate child support for the couple's minor son and (4) failing to award Mrs. Jones reasonable attorney fees.
The following facts were presented to the trial court: Between 1975 and 1980, while her husband pursued his undergraduate and law degrees, Tobye Jones was employed as a social worker with the Huntsville city schools. Her income during that period was almost the exclusive source of earned income for the couple. However, her income was heavily subsidized by her mother, Mrs. Moncus, through gifts and various joint savings and trust accounts.
During the three years he was attending law school in Birmingham (Mrs. Jones remained in Huntsville), Mr. Jones roomed and boarded with Mrs. Moncus and attempted to keep his expenses at a minimum. During this same period, Mrs. Jones' lifestyle remained unchanged by the couple's financial straits. With her mother's help, she lived essentially as she had previously. The record shows that rather than relying upon his wife's income to pay school expenses, Jones borrowed $15,000 to finance his law school tuition and books and that he sent as much as $2,000 per year of this money to Mrs. Jones for placement in their joint account in Huntsville.
While in law school, Jones traveled to Huntsville on weekends to be with his wife. Nevertheless, the couple drifted apart. The breakdown of their marriage continued after Jones left school and began his practice in Huntsville. He began seeing at least one other woman. The wife alleges that this was the sole factor leading to their divorce. Jones asserts other factors, including his wife's spendthrift ways and lack of affection.
The divorce decree required Jones to pay $250 monthly as child support. He had previously signed a promissory note obligating himself to repay Mrs. Moncus approximately $15,000 at a rate of $400 per month for money she advanced to Mrs. Jones while he was in school. He also executed a second promissory note agreeing to repay Mrs. Moncus $4,125 for the room and board he received while living with her. He is also currently paying $124 per month on his student loan and $200 per month in support of two children by a previous marriage.
In regard to Mrs. Jones' first, third and fourth alleged errors, we have frequently held that the awarding of attorney's fees, Gilliland v. Gilliland, 422 So.2d 299 (Ala.Civ.App.1982), child support, Wilbanks v. Wilbanks, 424 So.2d 641 (Ala.Civ.App.1982), alimony, Ashbee v. Ashbee, 431 So.2d 1312 (Ala.Civ.App.1983), and division of property, Eastman v. Eastman, 429 So.2d 1058 (Ala.Civ.App.1983), are all within the sound discretion of the trial court. The exercise of that discretion is presumed correct and will be disturbed on appeal only if unsupported by legal evidence or if palpably wrong. Smith v. Smith, 429 So.2d 1080 (Ala.Civ.App.1983). Though substantially more evidence was presented at trial concerning various transactions entered into by and between the couple, a reiteration of those facts here would serve no useful...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Archer v. Archer
...were in this case, considered by the court in making its alimony award to Jeanne. DECREE AFFIRMED, WITH COSTS. 1 Jones v. Jones, 454 So.2d 1006 (Ala.Civ.App.1984); Pyeatte v. Pyeatte, 135 Ariz. 346, 661 P.2d 196 (1982); Wisner v. Wisner, 129 Ariz. 333, 631 P.2d 115 (1981); Sullivan v. Sulli......
-
Simmons v. Simmons, 15658
...thirty-four have declined to consider an educational degree marital property subject to equitable distribution. See Jones v. Jones, 454 So.2d 1006 (Ala.Civ.App.1984); Nelson v. Nelson, 736 P.2d 1145 (Alaska 1987); Wisner v. Wisner, 129 Ariz. 333, 631 P.2d 115 (1981); In re Marriage of Sulli......
-
Marriage of Denton, Matter of
...to award a share of a professional license, advanced degree or of enhanced earning capacity as property, see Jones v. Jones, 454 So.2d 1006, 1009 (Ala.Civ.App.1984) (law degree); Wisner v. Wisner, 129 Ariz. 333, 339-40, 631 P.2d 115, 121-23 (App.1981) (medical license); Hughes v. Hughes, 43......
-
House v. House, 2130660.
...(Ala.Civ.App.2009) (quoting Pickett v. Pickett, 723 So.2d 71, 74 (Ala.Civ.App.1998) (plurality opinion), and citing Jones v. Jones, 454 So.2d 1006, 1009 (Ala.Civ.App.1984) ). "[A]n award of alimony in gross must be made based on the value of the marital estate and the parties' separate esta......