Title: Turner v. Turner

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Turner v. Turner (2003-068)

2004 VT 5

[Filed 15-Jan-2004]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                  2004 VT 5

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2003-068

                             OCTOBER TERM, 2003

  Brenda Turner	                       }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
       v.	                       }	Franklin Family Court
                                       }	
  David Turner	                       }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 168-6-01 Frdm

                                                Trial Judge: Howard E. 
                                                             VanBenthuysen

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.  Wife appeals from the trial court's final divorce order.  She
  argues that the trial court erred in: (1) determining the value of the
  parties' second home; (2) unfairly dividing the marital assets; and (3)
  refusing to award the full amount of attorney's fees that she requested. 
  We affirm in part and reverse and remand the trial court's partial award of
  attorney's fees.

       ¶  2.  Husband and wife were married for approximately sixteen years
  and have one child together.  They were separated in July 2001, and wife
  initiated divorce proceedings.  Both parties are in their late forties and
  in good health.  Both are employed.  Wife proposed a property distribution
  that would afford her approximately 39% of the value of the marital
  property, while husband would receive 61%.  After a hearing, the court made
  extensive findings and distributed the parties' assets.  Although the court
  disagreed with several of wife's proposed valuations of the marital assets,
  such as the value of the marital home and husband's business, it did not
  disagree with the general plan of distribution that she proposed.  The
  court awarded wife the marital assets she requested, which resulted in
  husband receiving a 57% share of the marital assets and wife a 43% share.
   
       ¶  3.  The court also awarded wife $1000 of the $8000 in attorney's
  fees that she incurred.  The court explained that under the "American rule"
  of attorney's fees, parties are generally expected to bear their own fees
  in litigation unless a statutory or rule-created exception exists.  The
  court found that while certain statutory exceptions existed, none applied
  in this case, and there was no general right to attorney's fees in divorce
  proceedings under Vermont law.  Thus, the court declined to consider the
  parties' respective incomes and financial circumstances in making its
  award.  The court concluded that, in the absence of any generalized
  statutory authority to award attorney's fees, it could depart from the
  American rule only in an "exceptional case," and then only where the party
  against whom fees were sought acted in an obstructionist or unconscionable
  manner.   See DJ Painting, Inc. v. Baraw Enter., Inc., 172 Vt. 239, 246,