The non-marital property assigned to Wife consisted of three items of tangible personal property of apparently minor value. Husband filed a timely motion to amend or modify the judgment. The trial court amended its judgment to address the issue of crops growing on land that was awarded Wife. The court ordered Husband to continue to be responsible for crop production, including costs, and Wife to be responsible for maintenance, taxes and certain transportation expenses. In all other respects, Husband's motion was denied.
Husband appeals the judgment.
Accordingly, we accept the evidence and inferences favorable to the trial court's ruling and disregard contrary evidence. We defer to the trial court's decision, even if the evidence could support a different conclusion. In Point I, Husband contends that the trial court erred in dividing the parties' marital property without first assigning a value to the pending personal injury claim and the pending medical malpractice suit. Wife does not dispute this. However, none of the cases cited by Husband support his theory that the trial court was required to assign a value to the claims.