Reynolds v. Reynolds

• Decision Date: 09 October 1970
• Citation: 458 S.W.2d 783
• Parties: Oudadiah REYNOLDS, Appellant, v. Darrell Walter REYNOLDS, Appellee.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Page 783

458 S.W.2d 783

Oudadiah REYNOLDS, Appellant, v. Darrell Walter REYNOLDS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 9, 1970.

C. B. Creech, Creech & Hogg, Ashland, for appellant.

Eldon Webb, Ashland, for appellee.

PALMORE, Judge.

Oudadiah Reynolds appeals from that portion of a divorce decree against her husband, Darrell Reynolds, which pertains to alimony.

The parties were married in 1946. When the evidence was taken last year Oudadiah was 39 and Darrell 44 years of age. He is a carpenter and back-up foreman at Armco Steel Company in Ashland and does some work on the side as a television repairman. She is employed by the General Telephone Company. They have three children, the oldest of whom is grown and the other two are of high-school age. After settling the property rights the chancellor awarded Oudadiah $100 per month for each of the two younger children and $50 per month as alimony, together with the exclusive right to occupy a jointly owned home, all subject to further orders of the court. Oudadiah contends that the amount of alimony is inadequate and that she is entitled to a lump-sum award.

Our review of the case is hampered by the lack of specific findings of fact, particularly with respect to property values. Sometimes it seems that CR 52.01 is honored more in the breach than the observance. However, we are able to deduce enough to convince us that the judgment is not clearly erroneous.

There were two items of real estate, the Jones Subdivision property and the home on Lynnhaven Court. The rental of $75 per month from the Jones Subdivision property, which is tax-assessed at $8,400, suggests that it may have a fair cash value of $9,000. Certainly there was no evidence that it would bring more than that. After deducting a mortgage debt of $5,429 this property has a maximum net value of $3,571. It was awarded to Darrell. Oudadiah conceded in her testimony that she had not put any money in it. The Lynnhaven Court place was purchased at a cost of $30,000. It is tax-assessed at $26,000 and there was no evidence of a market value greater than $30,000. The down payment was made out of credit union funds accumulated by Darrell. Over a period of five years Oudadiah made the mortgage payments of $127 per month out of her own income and reduced the principal balance by $4,390.47--that is, from $13,022.94 to $8,621.57. Deducting this balance from $30,000 leaves a net value of $21,378.43, of which Oudadiah contributed $4,390.47. The chancellor awarded her a one-third interest in fee, or the equivalent of $7,126.14, which is $2,735.67 more than the amount of her direct contribution.

The parties had two automobiles, a Volkswagen and a 1967 Cadillac on which Darrell had made a down payment of $2,100 and Oudadiah had kept up the subsequent mortgage payments out of her separate income. The chancellor awarded the Cadillac to Oudadiah and the Volkswagen to Darrell. Whatever, if anything, Oudadiah may have contributed toward the Volkswagen was not shown, nor was its value. Subject of course to depreciation, it can be said that the chancellor's disposition of the automobiles gave Oudadiah $2,100 more than she had put in, regardless of the amount of her contribution.

In addition to the items thus far enumerated Oudadiah paid $1,700...