Morrison v. Rubio
| Decision Date | 18 February 2022 |
| Docket Number | S-21-0126 |
| Citation | 2022 WY 26 |
| Parties | JOHN DAVID MORRISON, Appellant (Defendant), v. PEGGY SUE RUBIO f/k/a PEGGY SUE MORRISON, Appellee (Plaintiff). |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County The Honorable Kerri M. Johnson, Judge
Representing Appellant:
Hampton M. Young, Jr., Law Office of Hampton M. Young, Jr. PC, Casper, Wyoming.
Representing Appellee:
Keith R. Nachbar, Keith R. Nachbar, P.C., Casper, Wyoming.
Before FOX, C.J., and DAVIS [*] , KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, and GRAY, JJ.
[¶1] John Morrison (Husband) and Peggy Morrison[1] (Wife) divorced after five years of marriage. Husband appeals the district court's division of marital property. He contends that the district court abused its discretion when it awarded an inequitable and impermissibly punitive equalization payment to Wife. We affirm.
[¶2] Husband raises two issues, which we restate as one:
Did the district court abuse its discretion in its division of marital property?
[¶3] Husband and Wife started dating in May 2014. After dating six months, Wife moved in with Husband, living with him and two of his three children, including a teenage son. Husband and Wife started team truck driving in June 2015 and married in October 2015. In 2016, they decided Wife would stay home to allow Husband's teenage son, who often traveled on the road with them, to attend high school. Husband continued to drive truck. Wife cared for the teenager and renovated the house. Renovations included replacement of interior doors installation of wood flooring on the main level and carpet upstairs, renovation of the bathrooms, and outdoor landscaping. After about a year, Husband quit truck driving and took an oil field job with Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc. (Patterson) where he worked for roughly two and a half years.
[¶4] Husband and Wife made plans to sell the house, move into a fifth wheel trailer, and return to team truck driving. Husband testified that he borrowed $56, 851 in July 2019, to further improve the house in anticipation of selling it.[2] None of the funds were used for additional house renovations. Husband said that the bank required him to resolve outstanding credit obligations before allowing any of the money to be used for home improvements. The record was not clear as to whether these obligations were for joint or individual debt. Husband gave Wife $9, 950 and used $5, 000 to purchase a motorcycle trailer. Husband claimed Wife's unauthorized withdrawals from his account depleted any remaining money. Shortly after obtaining the loan, Husband left his job at Patterson. He testified that he was laid off; Wife testified that he quit.
[¶5] Wife had hip replacement surgery on October 8, 2019. That same day, Husband withdrew $22, 772.67 from his Patterson retirement account, closing it. He testified that he planned to use the retirement monies to support himself and Wife after losing his job. Wife claimed she did not know Husband had cashed out his retirement account, and she did not receive any money from it. While the exact date is unclear, around this same time, Husband sold the house, but the sale had not closed.
[¶6] Wife spent several days in the hospital before returning to the house to continue recovery. She was taking medications that made her groggy and caused her to sleep for long periods of time. While she recuperated, Husband and family friend, Raina Wendling (a dealer in used furniture), started packing the house.
[¶7] Those items intended for the yet unpurchased fifth wheel and other items that Ms. Wendling bought from the couple were moved to Ms. Wendling's furniture warehouse. Additional belongings designated as Wife's were moved to a storage unit rented in her name. Husband testified that he knew at this time he was going to leave the marriage, and he separated his belongings from the rest. Ms. Wendling testified that she witnessed Husband put these into his truck and none of them were stored at her warehouse. Husband attested that all of Wife's belongings went either to Wife's storage unit or Ms. Wendling's furniture warehouse. After everything was moved, Husband and Wife stayed at a motel for four days until the sale of the house closed.
[¶8] On closing the sale of the house, Husband received $50, 204.89. He used some of this money to purchase a fifth wheel trailer ($30, 000) and deposited the remainder ($20, 204.89) into his separately held bank account. Husband and Wife then retrieved the items stored in Ms. Wendling's warehouse and moved into the fifth wheel trailer. Shortly thereafter, Husband left in the middle of the night and never returned. He drove to California to see his children and to Arizona to look for a job. He rented a storage unit in Arizona and put his belongings there. On November 18, 2019, Wife filed for divorce.
[¶9] The district court held a two-day bench trial in January 2021. The parties presented conflicting testimony on their property, its location, and its value. The parties disputed ownership of the marital home. Husband asserted that he purchased the house in 2008 and was listed as the sole owner. He argued that Wife was not entitled to any proceeds from its sale. Wife testified to the significant improvements she had made to the house and argued she was entitled to half the equity.
[¶10] The parties also contested the location and ownership of certain personal property. Wife testified Husband took many of her personal belongings including items on which she placed a high value.[3] Among these, she claimed he took $20, 000 in cash that she had inherited from her father; a safe containing her jewelry (she valued at $20, 000); a log bedroom set (she valued at $8, 000); a bear head statue (she valued at $700); and a mountain lion statue (she valued at $1, 200).
[¶11] Husband explained he left in the middle of the night because Wife pointed a gun at him and threatened to shoot him unless he paid for COBRA[4] insurance. He testified that when he left, he took only his personal belongings. He maintained that the safe containing the jewelry and Wife's inheritance was under the bed in the fifth wheel trailer, and he left it there. As to the log bedroom set, Wife gave conflicting evidence on the proceeds from its sale. Her demonstrative trial exhibit indicated Husband sold it to Ms. Wendling and kept the money. She, initially, testified that she did not know what happened to the money and later said that the $800 was used to pay for the motel room where the couple stayed while waiting to move to the fifth wheel. Ms. Wendling testified that she sold the log bedroom set on consignment at her furniture store for $800. She was not asked what happened to the proceeds.
[¶12] There was conflicting testimony regarding the two animal statues. Wife testified that Husband sold the two animal statues to her ex-husband, Don Bower, and kept the money. Mr. Bower, contradicting her testimony, said that he bought both statues from Wife for $300 when she told him she needed money. He did not know where the money went after he gave it to Wife.
[¶13] Husband testified that he "was very careful separating everything in the house" while packing, and he did not take any of Wife's belongings. The court questioned this testimony because Husband was unwilling to disclose where these possessions were located. Both Wife's attorney and the court pressed Husband to reveal the city and state where he took his things. Husband eventually disclosed that he kept his belongings in a storage facility in Kingman, Arizona. He initially testified that he could not remember the name or address of the storage facility, but after a break in the proceedings, he provided the name.
[¶14] The district court entered a Decree of Divorce on February 11, 2021. The district court found Wife more credible than Husband. The court did not believe Husband's assertion that he left in the middle of the night because Wife threatened to shoot him. Instead, it found Wife's testimony-she did not know Husband planned on leaving and thought he had just gone to the store-more persuasive. The court did not credit Husband's claim that he had left the safe and other missing marital items with Wife "given the lengths to which [Husband] went to secrete all of his other property away from [Wife] and conceal his departure." It found:
After [Husband] left, he moved the items into a storage facility in Arizona, the name and location of which was not discovered until he was forced to disclose the same at trial. This demonstrates to the [c]ourt the surreptitious nature of [Husband's] activities at the end of this marriage, and his desire to gain an advantage over [Wife] in the division of their property.
The court further questioned Husband's credibility because "[Husband] denie[d] that many of the items [on Wife's proposed final property distribution spreadsheet] exist, however, he also denied that he had items concealed until he was forced by the [c]ourt to answer questions regarding this issue."
[¶15] The district court found the liquid assets in the marital estate included the proceeds from the sale of the parties' home, the funds from Husband's retirement account, and the money from the loan. Regarding the physical assets, the court awarded Wife the fifth wheel trailer, the couple's 2007 Chevy Suburban, and a Mossberg 500 12-gauge shotgun. The court ordered Husband to return all Wife's items he had in his possession. Husband received the 2014 custom Harley Davidson, the motorcycle trailer, a 2006 Dodge Ram 2500, a 1999 Buick LeSabre, an ATV, and cable boxes. Regarding division of debt, the court assigned Wife all the debt incurred after the separation. The court ordered Husband...
To continue reading
Request your trial