P

NO. 94-510

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

1995

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF

SHELLY L. SPENCER,

Petitioner and Appellant, &p,j ;) fj ;yyj

and

RICHARD V. SPENCER,

Respondent and Respondent.

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Nineteenth Judicial District,

In and for the County of Lincoln,

The Honorable Robert S. Keller, Judge presiding.

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant:

Donald L. Shaffer, Attorney at Law,

Libby, Montana

For Respondent:

William A. Douglas, Douglas & Sprinkle,

Libby, Montana

Filed:

Submitted on Briefs: May 4, 1995

Decided: June 6, 1995

* Clerk
Justice William E. Hunt, Sr., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Appellant Shelly L. Spencer appeals from that portion of a

dissolution decree from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court,

Lincoln County, which ordered her to divide with respondent

Richard V. Spencer the net proceeds from the eventual sale of the

family home in the event that Shelly remains in the home until the

minor children reach the age of 18, or graduate from high school.

We affirm.

Appellant raises the following issue:

Did the District Court err in determining that appellant

should divide with respondent the net proceeds from the eventual

sale of the family home in the event that she remains in the home

until the minor children reach the age of 18, or graduate from high

school?

The parties were married on May 28, 1987. Two children were

born to the parties during their marriage. Richard's parents

loaned the parties $2000 as a down payment for the purchase of a

$32,000 home. At the time of the dissolution hearing, the

principal balance owing on the home was $30,000. The monthly

purchase payment of $334 includes insurance and taxes. The

District Court ordered that Shelly be permitted to reside in the

home until both children reach the age of 18, or graduate from high

school. The District Court ordered further that in the event

Shelly should cease to use the home as her residence, or that when

the children reach the age of 18 or graduate from high school, the

property should be sold, Richard should be reimbursed the $2000

2
down payment loan he received from his parents, and the net

proceeds from the sale should be divided equally between the

parties. It is from this portion of the District Court's decree

that Shelly appeals.

We review a district court's division of marital property to

determine whether the division is clearly erroneous. In re

Marriage of Maedje (19941, 263 Mont. 262, 265-66, 868 P.2d 580,

583.

In In re Marriage of Rogers (1987), 226 Mont. 163, 734 P.2d

677, we concluded that it was not error to order that the wife

should receive an equal share of the proceeds from the sale of the

family home which was to occur after the children, who were in the

husband's custody, reached 18, even though the husband would be

making the mortgage payments until the home was sold.

We hold that it was not error for the District Court to order

an equal division of the proceeds from the eventual sale of the

family home pursuant to the terms of the dissolution decree.

We affirm.

Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court

1988 Internal Operating Rules, this decision shall not be cited as

precedent and shall be published by its filing as a public document

with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and by a report of its result

to Montana Law Week, State Reporter and West Publishing Company.

Justice

3
4
June 6, 1995

CEkTIFICATB OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the following certified order was sent by United States ~mail, prepaid,

following named:

Ati

50:

Lit

DONALD L. SHAFFER

:orney at Law

2 Main

Iby, MT 59923

E!D SMITH

C

STATE

:LBRK OF TIIB SUPREME COURT

OF MONTANA

William A. Douglas

Douglas & Sprinkle

Box 795

Libby, MT 59923-0795

to the