Wife claimed that husband was dissipating assets in contemplation of their separation and dissolution during that time. Husband continually refused to turn over the documents, and only turned over partial, inaccurate and disorganized records when the court ordered compliance with the discovery requests. The district court inferred that husband was dissipating assets based on his refusal to obey the discovery order and his non-cooperation throughout the separation. See Federated Mut. Next, husband argues that the district court erred in finding that he dissipated assets.
Dissipation is frivolous, unjustified spending of marital assets.
If a party in a dissolution proceeding disposes of marital assets, the party shall be accountable for those assets unless the assets are justifiably consumed to meet necessities of life or in the usual course of business. Husband claims that he did not have a nefarious purpose in spending the parties' money. But section 518.58 does not require a nefarious purpose. Rather, section 518.58 states that both parties to a dissolution action owe a fiduciary duty to one another for any profit or loss derived without the consent of the other pending the dissolution. In addition, there is evidence that husband wasted the parties' assets prior to appointment of the receiver.