Turner v. Turner, 17257

Decision Date25 May 1982
Docket NumberNo. 17257,17257
PartiesShirlene Rae TURNER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Thomas DeLan TURNER, Defendant and Respondent.
CourtUtah Supreme Court

Milton T. Harmon, Nephi, for plaintiff and appellant.

Donald J. Eyre, Jr., Nephi, for defendant and respondent.

STEWART, Justice:

Plaintiff appeals what she contends is an inequitable disposition of the marital estate and an inadequate award of alimony and attorney's fees in a divorce case.

Plaintiff and defendant were married in San Leandro, California, in 1971. Both had been married previously. The defendant brought assets into the marriage in the amount of approximately $29,000. No children were born as issue of their marriage. Plaintiff's minor son from her previous marriage was supported by both plaintiff and defendant throughout their marriage. Plaintiff entered the marriage with household furnishings, fixtures, and items of personal care and upkeep. Defendant possessed household furnishings, fixtures, a pick-up truck with a camper, Honda motorcycles, hand tools, electric welding equipment, interest in a lot, a home bought on contract in contemplation of the marriage with a down payment of $6,738, and savings in the sum of $10,000.

Prior to the divorce both parties were employed. Although defendant had reached retirement age, he continued his employment with the Oakland City Police Department for an additional year to qualify his wife for certain portions of his pension benefits. Plaintiff continued her employment with Bank of America during the years she remained in California.

In 1974 the parties began to acquire property in Utah in furtherance of their goal to move to Utah and own and operate a small farm. To make payments on the property and acquire the necessary farm machinery, defendant worked as an iron worker. In 1976 defendant came to Utah alone to work on the farm and to obtain employment locally. At times defendant devoted seven days a week and twelve hours a day to his work to supplement the family income and make the farming operation successful. In 1977 plaintiff moved to Utah with defendant. Plaintiff terminated her job with the Bank of America at the time she moved and withdrew her pension funds in order to help acquire the Utah real estate, thereby terminating all future pension benefits. The parties purchased the "Malmgren" and the "Horton" homes, as well as the "Christensen" and "Bendixen" farms, in Lehi, Utah. Plaintiff was responsible for the management functions of the parties' property and the family business.

At the time of the divorce, defendant was 60 years old with various health problems. Plaintiff was 41, in good health, and employed as a receptionist at a local medical clinic with a net monthly income of approximately $540. Defendant's net monthly income consisted of a $923 pension from the Oakland City Police Department and whatever income he was able to derive from the farm. Plaintiff's monthly living expenses were found to total $763.00 with an expected increase to.$1000.00 per month due to her son's projected church mission or college expense.

The court awarded plaintiff the Horton home and all household furnishings, fixtures, and food storage located in the home and upon the property; a horse; a Honda 125; a judgment in the sum of $10,000 against defendant; a judgment against defendant for $1,400 which was the balance due on a loan from plaintiff's son which had been applied on the down payment for the Horton home; and a judgment against defendant in the amount of the unpaid balance on the Horton home of $20,000.

The defendant was awarded the Malmgren home and the furnishings, fixtures, and food storage located there; the Christensen and Bendixen farms; all farm supplies, improvements, and machinery; a pick-up truck; two motorcycles; the 1960 Rangle camper; a horse and colt; and three cemetery lots. The court granted plaintiff alimony in the sum of $50 per month for twenty-four consecutive months and $500 attorney's fees.

The parties, as is not uncommon, placed widely disparate values on the assets to be distributed. Plaintiff argues that, according to her appraisal, she received 27% of the assets or, according to defendant's appraisal, she received 33% of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Marriage of Hunt, In re
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1995
    ...(1977) ( "The [trial court] need not be hamstrung in devising methods to accomplish an equitable division of property." ); Turner v. Turner, 649 P.2d 6 (Utah 1982) (refusing to modify a trial court's equitable distribution unless clearly unjust or clear abuse of Synthesizing the decisions r......
  • Taft v. Taft
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • June 30, 2016
    ...of the assets is a matter for the trial court which will not be reviewed in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion.” Turner v. Turner , 649 P.2d 6, 8 (Utah 1982) (stating that an appellate court will not weigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for that of a trial court merely bec......
  • Kramer v. Kramer, 20778
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • May 15, 1987
    ...201 (Utah 1985); Mineer v. Mineer, 706 P.2d 1060, 1062 (Utah 1985); Nilson v. Nilson, 652 P.2d 1323, 1324-25 (Utah 1982); Turner v. Turner, 649 P.2d 6, 8 (Utah 1982); Fletcher v. Fletcher, 615 P.2d 1218, 1222 (Utah 1980); Jorgensen v. Jorgensen, 599 P.2d 510, 511-12 (Utah 1979); Hunsaker v.......
  • Gardner v. Gardner, 19246
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • January 4, 1988
    ...of property and income so that the parties may readjust their lives to their new circumstances as well as possible. Turner v. Turner, 649 P.2d 6 (Utah 1982); MacDonald v. MacDonald, 120 Utah 573, 236 P.2d 1066 (1951). Although this Court may modify decisions of the trial court, its apportio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Utah Standards of Appellate Review
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 7-8, October 1994
    • Invalid date
    ...injustice or inequity that indicates a clear abuse of . . . discretion.'" Crockett, 836 P.2d at 819-820 (quoting Turner v. Turner, 649 P.2d 6, 8 (Utah 1982)). However, "[w]hile trial courts have broad discretion . . . that discretion must be exercised within legal parameters set by appellat......

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