### No. 81-56 INTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1981

IN RE THEMARRIAGE OF ELEANOR ANNIE CREON, Petitioner and Respondent,

VS

# . EUGENE EARL CREON, Respondent and Appellant.

Appeal from: District Court of the Nineteenth Judicial District, In and for the County of Lincoln Honorable Robert C. Holter, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: ForAppellant: Moore and Doran,Kalispell,Montana For Respondent: Ann German, Missoula,Montana

Submitted on briefs: August 

### 27, 1981 Decided: 

# ' lQ41

ClerkThe court valued and distributed the property of the par

### ties as follows:

TO the Wife:

Farm Property, Lincoln Co. $ 65,900.00 Residence, 211 Nevada 12,000.00 John 

### Deere Tractor 4,500.00 

### Mower, Conditioner 1,800.00 Bailer 100.00 12' John Deere Plow 500.00 Bailer, Elevator 65.00 Truck Snow Plow 500.00 St. Regis Stock, except "Bonus Stock" 3,000.00 1971Chrysler 250.00 15Head Livestock 5,000.00 TOTAL $ 93,615-00

To the Husband:

MC-40 Crawler M. M. 

### Tractor 2 Farm Tractors Carpentry and Mechanics Tools Boat 

### Motors, Chain Saws, etc. 1977 Dodge Truck 1970Chrysler 1940 Dodge Truck 1937 Chrysler Imperial 5thWheel Trailer Misc.

## *

## ,Antique Outboard Motors, 32/20 Pistol, 3 Cameras, Oak Table and DistinctlyPersonal Items TOTAL $15,275.00

The courtmade thisdistribution of property inlieu of maintenance and ordered that each party be responsible for hisown attorney fees. On appeal the husband raised the issue of whether the District Court abused its discretion indistributing the

### marital property and whether the findings of fact are supported by sufficient evidence. Specifically, the husband contends that the distribution of property is inequitable and that the trial court failed to take into consideration his substantial contributions 

### to the support of his family and improvements 

### to the property. The husband 

### alsomaintains that the valuation of certain 

### items ofMr. Chief ~ustice Frank I. Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court. The marriage of the parties 

### was dissolved by decree entered December 31, 1979. The determinationof property division,maintenance and attorney fees 

### was resewed for

### a hearing which was held on July 14and 17, 1980. The District Court of Lincoln County entered 

### its findings, conclusions and judgment on October 8, 1980. The husband appeals from the property division. The parties entered into a common 

### lawmarriage commencing in 1951after the husband obtained a dissolutionof a prior marriage. The relationshipof the parties dates from 1947. They have raised one child who 

### was an adult at 

### timeof trial. The wife acquired 

### a residence inLibby, Montana, during her priormarriage which 

### was dissolved in 1947. In 1949, a farm 

### of 79 acres 

### was purchased for

### a consideration of $5,000. The deed 

### is dated June 23, 1949 and is 

### to "Eleanor A. Huffman, single

woman of Libby, Montana." During the marriage the parties resided on the farm and both worked on it and contributed 

### to it. In 1971the husband bought a trailerhouse inLibby and primarily 1

ived there thereafter

# . During the marriage the husband 

### was employed at St. Regis Lumber Company, formerlyJ. NeilsLumber Company. He retired in 1980and receives a pension of $596 permonth and Social Security benefitsof $519 permonth. The husband devoted hiswages during themarriage to the support of the family and to improvements on the farm and the house inLibby. Since 1978the wife has supported herself by occasional employment, 

### sale of timber from the farm and raising 

### cattle on the farm. She receives Social Securityof approximately $300permonth, and rent from the house inLibby 

### of $100 permonth. The court found she could expect an income of approximately $3,000 to $5,000 from the farm. The wife testified she desired 

### to stayon the farm and make it profitable. The husband had no desire 

### to keep the farm, but wanted it sold and the proceeds divided.personal property is in

### error. Indetermining whether the 

### trial court abused its discretion, the reviewing court does not substitute 

### itsjudgment for thatof the 

### trial court. The standard for review is whether the trialcourt acted arbitrarilywithout employment of conscientiousjudgment 

### or exceeded the bounds of reason resulting in substantial injustice. See In 

### re the Marriage of Stratford (1981)1 Mont

# . ,631P.2d 296, 38 St.Rep. 1093; Zell v. Zell (1977), 174Mont. 216, 570 P.2d 33. The 

### ~istrict Court exercised reasoned judgment individing the property as 

### set forth above, taking into consideration the factors in section 40-4-202, MCA. The husband has an incane of $13,380 per year, while the wife receives approximately $7,200 per year from various sources including the farm. The District Court reasoned that an award of the farm 

### to the wife would enable her to

### meet her expenses without maintenance from the husband. The District Court 

### was well 

### aware of the debts of the parties and the encumbrances on the property awarded to each. Without the farm and the income, however small, that it provides for the wife, she could not support herself. The improvements on the farm 

### are substantiallydeteriorated and the land is not suitable for development. No substantial injusticeresulted by the award of the farm to the wife. The husband contests the valuation given by the 

### ~istrict Court to the fifthwheel 

### trailer, the 1977 Dodge truck and the tools. The husband would value the 

### trailer at $0 due 

### to a $5,500 encumbrance, the Dodge truck at$1,500 and the 

### tools at $400. The trial court clearlydid consider the outstanding debts secured by the trailer and Dodge truck. Further, the husband presented no valuation of the Dodge truck to the court below and he may not on appeal 

### assert a figure not given for the trial court's consideration. The value assigned to the truck 

### is reasonable. The wife valued the 

### tools at $3,000 and the husband disagreed.The District Court as

### trier of fact decided 

### to accept the wife's valuation 

### as to the 

### tools, and thisdetermination will stand unless it is clearlyerroneous. Rule 52(a),M.R.Civ.P. We find

no 

### error. The trial court accepted the husband's valuations of severalother 

### items of property in lieuof the wife's 

### lower estimates. These decisions 

### are leftto the trial courtls judgment

# . Affirmed

# .

Chief Justice

We concur: