Languell v. Languell, No. 1067A82

Docket NºNo. 1067A82
Citation143 Ind.App. 24, 237 N.E.2d 587
Case DateJune 13, 1968
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

Page 587

237 N.E.2d 587
143 Ind.App. 24
Glenda L. LANGUELL, Appellant,
v.
Wilson LANGUELL, Appellee.
No. 1067A82.
Appellate Court of Indiana.
June 13, 1968.

[143 Ind.App. 25]

Page 588

Courtney W. Kerwin, Max C. Shirley, Kokomo, for appellant.

Daniel J. Gamble, Ellis & Gamble, Fred G. Osborn, Hodson & Osborn, Kokomo, for appellee.

FAULCONER, Judge.

Appellant filed suit against appellee for absolute divorce. Appellee filed a cross-complaint against appellant also requesting an absolute divorce. After trial by court appellee was granted an absolute divorce on his cross-complaint. Appellant's motion for new trial was overruled and is assigned as error on this appeal.

The main issue in this appeal is appellant's contention that the trial court abused its descretion in the division of the property of the parties.

It appears generally from the evidence that the parties were married for 27 years and raised two children to adulthood who are now themselves married. Appellee was employed during the marriage, and for the last 16 years thereof the appellant operated a beauty salon in a garage, converted for that purpose, which was attached to their house. At the time of trial the parties owned as tenants by entireties, the house and lot appraised at $25,000, furnishings appraised at $2,209, a 1964 Pontiac automobile appraised at $1500, beauty shop equipment appraised at $1,285, $4,000 in a credit union account and $166 in a checking account. Their liabilities consisted of a mortgage on the real estate in the amount of $5,200.

The trial court awarded appellant the personal property in her possession, the beauty shop equipment, one three piece bedroom set and $500 in cash. The appellee was awarded the real estate and all other personal property 'as set out in said appraisal.' Appellant testified that appellee agreed that she (appellant) would receive one-half of the money in the credit union consisting of $4,000. However, we cannot determine from the evidence, finding or judgment to whom such money [143 Ind.App. 26] was awarded. Neither the balance of $166 in the checking account, nor the money in the credit union, is listed in the appraisal referred to in the finding and judgment of the trial court. However, it does appear from the argument section of the respective briefs that the amount in the credit union account is considered as part of the property awarded to appellee-husband.

Excluding the amounts in the credit union and checking account it would appear that appellant received property of the total value of approximately $1,885, while the appellee received property of the total net value of approximately $23,400. Adding thereto the amount in the checking account and the credit union, the total amount received by appellee would be approximately $28,000. Appellant so lists such amount in her brief which is not challenged or contradicted by appellee in his brief.

The trial court under our statutes has the right and duty to settle and determine the property rights of the parties in an action for divorce. In this respect the trial court has broad judicial discretion and its action in the adjustment of property rights will not be interfered with unless an abuse is clearly shown. Von Pein v. Von Pein (1964), 136 Ind.App. 283, 286, 200 N.E.2d 230; Tomchany v. Tomchany (1962), 134 Ind.App. 27, 32, 185 N.E.2d 301;

Page 589

Draime v. Draime (1961), 132 Ind.App. 99, 103, 173 N.E.2d 70 (Transfer denied); McHie v. McHie (1939), 106 Ind.App. 152, 177, 16 N.E.2d 987...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Zagajewski v. Zagajewski, No. 2--173A8
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • July 31, 1974
    ...discretion which neither evidence nor argument dispels, the judgment as to the property must be reversed. Languell v. Languell (1968), 143 Ind.App. 24, 237 N.E.2d On remand, unless the parties can agree on the terms of a new judgment which meets the approval of the trial court, a new trial ......
  • Dunbar v. Dunbar, No. 169A7
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • October 16, 1969
    ...one-half interest in a commercial lot on Brookville Road in Indianapolis. Appellant relies primarily upon Languell v. Languell, Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 587 (1968), which is factually very dissimilar from the present case. In that case the parties had been married 27 years, had accumulated prop......
  • Chaleff v. Chaleff, No. 568A86
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • April 29, 1969
    ...in Burns' Ind.Stat.Ann., § 3--1219. It was not abused in Dorman and it was not abused here. Likewise, Languell v. Languell, Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 587 (1968), is not in point. In that case the husband was granted a divorce on his cross-complaint. This court held that it was an abuse of discre......
  • Boshonig v. Boshonig, No. 270A21
    • United States
    • March 22, 1971
    ...trial court did not assign a dollar amount to it. The appellant further relies upon the case of Languell v. Languell (1968), Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 587, in that [148 Ind.App. 502] the award, at least from a percentage standpoint, was similar to the case at bar. The distinguishing characterist......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Zagajewski v. Zagajewski, No. 2--173A8
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • July 31, 1974
    ...discretion which neither evidence nor argument dispels, the judgment as to the property must be reversed. Languell v. Languell (1968), 143 Ind.App. 24, 237 N.E.2d On remand, unless the parties can agree on the terms of a new judgment which meets the approval of the trial court, a new trial ......
  • Dunbar v. Dunbar, No. 169A7
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • October 16, 1969
    ...one-half interest in a commercial lot on Brookville Road in Indianapolis. Appellant relies primarily upon Languell v. Languell, Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 587 (1968), which is factually very dissimilar from the present case. In that case the parties had been married 27 years, had accumulated prop......
  • Chaleff v. Chaleff, No. 568A86
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • April 29, 1969
    ...in Burns' Ind.Stat.Ann., § 3--1219. It was not abused in Dorman and it was not abused here. Likewise, Languell v. Languell, Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 587 (1968), is not in point. In that case the husband was granted a divorce on his cross-complaint. This court held that it was an abuse of discre......
  • White v. White, No. 1-181A2
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • September 28, 1981
    ...rights in money, in physical assets, or in both. Snyder v. Snyder, (1965) 246 Ind. 292, 205 N.E.2d 159; Languelle v. Languelle, (1968) 143 Ind.App. 24, 237 N.E.2d In making a division of marital property, the court properly considers the separate property rights of the parties as well as al......
  • 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