Snyder v. Snyder

• Decision Date: 20 October 2021
• Docket Number: S-21-0067
• Citation: 2021 WY 115
• Parties: BENJAMIN M. SNYDER, Appellant (Defendant), v. LAURA E. SNYDER, Appellee (Plaintiff).
• Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

2021 WY 115

BENJAMIN M. SNYDER, Appellant (Defendant),
v.
LAURA E. SNYDER, Appellee (Plaintiff).

No. S-21-0067

Supreme Court of Wyoming

October 20, 2021

Appeal from the District Court of Big Horn County The Honorable William L. Simpson, Judge.

Representing Appellant:

Christopher J. King, APEX Legal, P.C., Worland, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee:

Alex H. Sitz, III, Meinecke & Sitz, LLC, Cody, Wyoming.

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

1

KAUTZ, Justice.

[¶1] In this divorce case, the district court awarded Benjamin M. Snyder (Husband) all the interest in his business and ordered him to pay Laura E. Snyder (Wife) $100, 000 to equalize the property distribution. Husband asserts the district court abused its discretion in valuing the business and requiring him to make the equalization payment within 120 days of the divorce and erred by granting Wife a judgment against his business. He also claims the district court violated his constitutional rights by allowing Wife to take their minor child (Child) to church during his visitation time. We affirm the district court's property disposition and visitation order but reverse the judgment against the business.

ISSUES

[¶2] The issues raised by Husband, which we have reworded, are:

1. Did the district court abuse its discretion by assigning a value to Husband's business using Wife's expert's opinion

2. Did the district court abuse its discretion by requiring Husband to make the equalization payment to Wife within 120 days of the divorce?

3. Did the district court err by awarding a judgment against Husband's business?

4. Did the district court violate Husband's constitutional rights to parent or to freedom of religion by allowing Wife to take Child to church during his visitation time?

FACTS

[¶3] Husband and Wife married in 1998, and Wife filed for divorce in 2019. The parties and Child lived in Lovell, Wyoming, where Husband owned and operated Home Technology Solutions, LLC (HTS). HTS installed network, telecom, and audio/video wiring and equipment for residential and commercial customers. Husband obtained a Wyoming low voltage contractor's license to operate the business.

[¶4] The parties' primary marital assets were HTS; their home, together with a bank account containing money to repair the roof; and another business owned by Husband, Snyder Enterprises. Snyder Enterprises was purchasing a building from Husband's parents and leasing it to HTS. After a trial, the district court awarded HTS and Snyder Enterprises to Husband and the house with the roof fund to Wife. Using Wife's expert's opinion, the district court assigned HTS a value of $300, 000. To equalize the property distribution, the court ordered Husband to pay Wife $100, 000 within 120 days of the divorce.

2

[¶5] The district court granted Wife primary physical custody of Child. Husband was awarded liberal visitation under the same terms as a stipulated interim order entered while the divorce was pending. Husband was to have visitation with Child every other weekend, every other Tuesday night, and for five weeks in the summer. As per the earlier stipulated order, Wife was allowed to take Child for one hour on Sundays when Husband had visitation so she could take Child to church. Husband appealed.

DISCUSSION

A. Property Disposition

[¶6] Husband contends the district court abused its discretion by adopting Wife's expert's opinion on the value of HTS and ordering him to make the equalization payment within 120 days of the divorce. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-114(a) (LexisNexis 2021) governs the disposition of a couple's marital property in a divorce:

[I]n granting a divorce, the court shall make such disposition of the property of the parties as appears just and equitable, having regard for the respective merits of the parties and the condition in which they will be left by the divorce, the party through whom the property was acquired and the burdens imposed upon the property for the benefit of either party and children. . . .

[¶7] "Disposition of marital property is 'committed to the sound discretion of the district court.'" Begley v. Begley, 2020 WY 77, ¶ 20, 466 P.3d 276, 283 (Wyo. 2020) (quoting Porter v. Porter, 2017 WY 77, ¶ 12, 397 P.3d 196, 198 (Wyo. 2017)) (other citations omitted). "We review a division of property for abuse of discretion[.]" Conzelman v. Conzelman, 2019 WY 123, ¶ 15, 453 P.3d 773, 778 (Wyo. 2019). See also, Edwards v. Edwards, 2020 WY 35, ¶¶ 15-18, 459 P.3d 448, 451-52 (Wyo. 2020) (applying the abuse of discretion standard to review the district court's division of marital property). To determine whether the district court abused its discretion, "we consider the reasonableness of its decision." Golden v. Guion, 2016 WY 54, ¶ 18, 375 P.3d 719, 724 (Wyo. 2016). See also, Verheydt v. Verheydt, 2013 WY 25, ¶ 19, 295 P.3d 1245, 1250 (Wyo. 2013) ("In determining whether an abuse of discretion occurred, our core inquiry is the reasonableness of the district court's decision." (citing Hanson v. Belveal, 2012 WY 98, ¶ 14, 280 P.3d 1186, 1192 (Wyo. 2012)). "We will not disturb a property division in a...