Title: MARRIAGE OF DAHL
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 79-109
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: May 12, 1980

No. 79-109 I N THE S U P R E M E COURT O F THE STATE O F MONTANA 1980 I N THE MARRIAGE OF: B E V E R L Y D A H L , P e t i t i o n e r and Respondent, VS . ROGER DAHL, Respondent and Appellant. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Eighth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County of Cascade. Honorable J o e l G. Roth, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Robert J. Ernmons, Great F a l l s , Montana For Respondent: Cameron Ferguson and Dola Wilson, Great F a l l s , Montana - - Submitted on b r i e f s : A p r i l 25, 1980 Decided: #fly 1 2 1 9 8 4 Filed: $Jfi-y'j~ j $ & - J M r . J u s t i c e John Conway Harrison d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. This i s an appeal from a decree adjudicating property r i g h t s , a cash award, and a t t o r n e y f e e s following a divorce entered i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Eighth J u d i c i a l D i s - t r i c t , Cascade County, t h e Honorable J o e l G. Roth presiding. The i s s u e s f o r review are: 1. Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t abuse i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n making a d i v i s i o n of property between t h e p a r t i e s ? 2. Did t h e c o u r t err i n awarding M r s . Dahl a t t o r n e y f e e s ? 3. Did t h e t r i a l c o u r t err i n awarding M r s . Dahl monies borrowed by her from her f a t h e r t o pay a mortgage and medical expenses, when M r . Dahl was s a i d t o be responsible and f a i l e d t o pay? The p a r t i e s i n t h i s a c t i o n w e r e married i n 1956. Five c h i l d r e n were born of t h e marriage, two of whom were minors a t t h e t i m e of t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s judgment on A p r i l 301 1979. I n November 1974, a decree w a s entered granting t h e p a r t i e s a divorce and d e f e r r i n g matters of support and property settlement pending f u r t h e r hearings. N o appeal was taken from t h a t decree. P r i o r t o t h e e n t r y of t h e decree, an order w a s entered by t h e c o u r t d i r e c t i n g M r . Dahl t o pay t h e sum of $500 f o r c h i l d support and a l s o t o make t h e house payment. I n 1976, following a hearing, f i n d i n g s of f a c t , conclu- s i o n s of law, and an order w e r e entered, providing f o r support, custody, and t h e d i v i s i o n of t h e property. M r s . Dahl appealed from t h a t o r d e r , and t h i s Court remanded t h e case f o r f u r t h e r proceedings. Dahl v. Dahl (1978), Mont. , 577 P.2d 1230, 35 St.Rep. 536. Thereafter, following a hearing, t h e t r i a l c o u r t entered findings of f a c t , conclusions of law, and judgment on ~ p r i l 3 0 , 1979. This judgment made a property d i v i s i o n ; required M r . Dahl t o pay back c h i l d support; d i r e c t e d t h a t he pay M r s . D a h l f s f a t h e r c e r t a i n sums; awarded M r s . Dahl attorney fees; granted Mrs. Dahl t h e custody of t h e minor children; and provided f o r support. From t h i s order M r . Dahl appeals. I n t h e e a r l i e r case on appeal before t h i s Court we: (1) ordered a new t r i a l on t h e i s s u e of back support; ( 2 ) d i r e c t e d t h e lower c o u r t t o make findings as t o why attorney f e e s w e r e n o t awarded; and ( 3 ) d i r e c t e d a new t r i a l on t h e i s s u e of t h e d i v i s i o n of t h e property. W e found i n our previous opinion with regard t o t h e property d i v i s i o n t h a t t h e r e was no competent evidence of t h e value of some of t h e p r i n c i p a l i t e m s of t h e m a r i t a l property, i.e., Dahl's Wrecking Service and property used i n connection therewith. I n addition, although the p a r t i e s had been ordered t o t u r n over specified f i n a n c i a l records t o a c e r t i f i e d accountant approved by t h e court, t h i s w a s never done; and t h e a p p r a i s a l submitted by M r . Dahl's accountant was n o t c e r t i f i e d b u t was prepared by t h a t accountant on t h e b a s i s of information supplied only by M r . Dahl. Following remand, t h e District Court entered new find- ings of f a c t , conclusions of law and judgment. ~ n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, t h e property was divided e s s e n t i a l l y i n t h e same way a s before--1lrs. Dahl received the house, and M r . Dahl re- ceived t h e business property subject t o some l i e n s . I n t h i s instance, however, M r . Dahl appears a s appellant r a t h e r than as respondent. I n t h e second hearing before t h e D i s t r i c t Court, M r . Dahl d i d n o t appear o r supply any information t o assist t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n reaching a proper and j u s t settlement of t h e p a r t i e s ' property. The problem t h a t caused t h e appeal t o be made i n t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e w a s M r . D a h l t s f a i l u r e t o comply with t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s order t o supply adequate f i g u r e s concerning t h e business worth of h i s property. This Court r-oted i n i t s e a r l i e r opinion t h a t t h e District Court d i d n o t have competent evidence t o e s t a b l i s h t h e value of t h e Dahl Wrecking Service. O n second hearing, M r . Dahl again f a i l e d t o supply t h e necessary records, although ordered t o do s o by t h e D i s t r i c t Court. H e a l s o f a i l e d t o r e t u r n c e r t a i n business records delivered t o him by M r s . Dahl d e s p i t e an agreement t o do so. A t t h e hearing on remand, M r . Dahl f a i l e d t o submit any business records showing what happened t o t h e business assets o t h e r than t h e land and t h e building. H e f a i l e d t o appear and t o t e s t i f y a t t h e hearing, a s previously noted. Yet, he now appeals t h e D i s t r i c t Court d e c i s i o n and, i n e f f e c t , argues t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i d n o t have s u f f i c i e n t evidence t o make f i n d i n g s concerning t h e business. The D i s t r i c t Court noted t h a t a p p e l l a n t had f a i l e d t o p r e s e n t t o t h e c o u r t a proper v a l u a t i o n f i g u r e f o r t h e business, b u t on t h e b a s i s of t h e information presented, t h e c o u r t f a i r l y divided t h e p a r t i e s ' m a r i t a l property. The c o u r t found t h a t M r s . Dahl needed t h e house t o maintain a reasonable standard of l i v i n g and provide a home f o r t h e minor children; t h a t i n view of her income and expenses it w a s u n l i k e l y t h a t she would be a b l e t o otherwise provide s u i t a b l e housing; and t h a t M r . Dahl, i n view of h i s experience and s k i l l s , was capable of earning s u f f i c i e n t income t o provide f o r her needs. While a p p e l l a n t contends t h a t t h e District Court's property d i v i s i o n was u n f a i r because h i s share of t h e par- ties' m a r i t a l a s s e t s i s i n e f f e c t reduced by t h e amount of various f e d e r a l and s t a t e income t a x l i e n s f i l e d a g a i n s t him, w e note t h a t t h e s e l i e n s r e p r e s e n t a p p e l l a n t ' s d e l i n - quent f e d e r a l and state income t a x o b l i g a t i o n s primarily f o r t h e years 1974 through 1977. The p a r t i e s w e r e divorced i n This matter has been pending now f o r a period of some s i x years s i n c e t h e time of the o r i g i n a l divorce. I n considering t h e t o t a l record i n both appeals, w e f i n d t h a t t h e f a i l u r e of a p p e l l a n t Roger Dahl t o cooperate with t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n t h i s matter i s such as t o preclude t h e c o u r t from a r r i v i n g a t a b e t t e r settlement of t h e m a r i t a l e s t a t e than has now been done. Aanenson v. Aanenson (1979), - Mont. , 598 P.2d 1120, 36 St.Rep. 1525, set f o r t h prin- c i p l e s which provide a guide i n s e t t l i n g t h i s matter. I n Aanenson, w e recognized c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s t o be applied, s t n t i n g : "Although t h e D i s t r i c t Court may equally d i v i d e t h e marital a s s e t s , such a d i s t r i b u t i o n i s n o t mandated by s e c t i o n 40-4-202, MCA. [ C i t a t i o n s omitted.] Each case must be looked a t i n d i v i - d u a l l y , with an eye t o i t s unique circumstances. [ C i t a t i o n s omitted. 1 "A District Court has f a r reaching d i s c r e t i o n i n resolving property d i v i s i o n s , and i t s judg- ment w i l l n o t be a l t e r e d unless c l e a r abuse of d i s c r e t i o n i s shown. [ C i t a t i o n s omitted.] The t e s t f o r reviewing t h e District C o u r t ' s d i s c r e - t i o n is: Did t h e D i s t r i c t Court i n t h e e x e r c i s e of i t s d i s c r e t i o n a c t a r b i t r a r i l y without em- ployment of conscientious judgment, o r exceed t h e bounds of reason i n view of a l l of t h e c i r - cumstances? [ C i t a t i o n s omitted.]" Aanenson, 558 P.2d a t 1123, 36 St.Rep. a t 1528. A f t e r reviewing t h e findings of f a c t and conclusions of law set f o r t h by t h e D i s t r i c t Court t o settle t h i s matter, w e f i n d t h e above p r i n c i p l e s support i t s findings, and they a r e affirmed. The second i s s u e before us concerns a t t o r n e y f e e s . The ~ i s t r i c t Court found t h a t respondent, M r s . Dahl, d i d n o t have s u f f i c i e n t income t o pay her a t t o r n e y f e e s . That finding is s u b s t a n t i a t e d by t h e evidence. N o evidence w a s introduced by M r . Dahl concerning h i s c u r r e n t income although M r s . Dahl t e s t i f i e d t h a t he was a good welder and mechanic. M r s . Dahl made a showing of n e c e s s i t y f o r t h e award of f e e s , and t h e D i s t r i c t Court f a i r l y concluded t h a t a p p e l l a n t should pay her a t t o r n e y f e e s . The t h i r d i s s u e concerns t h e award t o M r s . Dahl t h e sums of $4,537.18 and $262.00 representing monies borrowed by her from her f a t h e r t o pay mortgage and medical expenses. A t t h e t i m e of t h e divorce i n A p r i l 1974, t h e D i s t r i c t Court ordered a p p e l l a n t t o make t h e p a r t i e s ' monthly house pay- ments i n a d d i t i o n t o c h i l d support f o r t h e p a r t i e s ' children. A t t h e second hearing on t h i s matter, t h e D i s t r i c t Court took j u d i c i a l n o t i c e of t h i s order. Appellant f a i l e d t o keep t h e s e payments c u r r e n t and M r s . Dahl w a s required t o borrow necessary funds from her f a t h e r t o meet t h e s e pay- ments. Over a period of t i m e , her f a t h e r paid $4,537.18 t o Great F a l l s Federal Savings and Loan t o keep h i s daughter and her family l i v i n g i n t h e family home. While a p p e l l a n t argues t h a t t h e r e w a s no agreement on t h i s matter, t h e f a c t is t h a t he had been ordered by t h e c o u r t t o make t h e house payments and f a i l e d t o do so. A t t h e second hearing, M r s . Dahl's f a t h e r produced cancelled checks i n t o evidence showing how much he had advanced i n t h e way of payments t o t h e savings and loan company t o keep t h e family i n t h e family home. Roger ~ a h l made t h e house payments f o r approximately two years a s ordered, b u t deducted tho amounts s o paid from what he was ordered t o pay as c h i l d support. He was given f u l l c r e d i t f o r whatever payments he a c t u a l l y made f o r e i t h e r c h i l d support o r payments on t h e house, d e s p i t e t h e unauthorized manner i n which he made t h e s e payments. Appel- l a n t argues t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t converted an a l l e g e d d e f i - ciency a s t o t h e payments i n t o a "property division." The t r i a l c o u r t , i n making a property d i v i s i o n , n o t only had t h e function of dividing t h e p a r t i e s ' property between them, b u t a l s o t o make provision f o r and a l l o c a t e t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e payment of d e b t s and o b l i g a t i o n s regarding such property. Appellant's o b l i g a t i o n t o make t h e house payment r e l a t e d t o property awarded t o M r s . Dahl--the house. Appellant argues t h a t he should n o t have t o make t h e $4,537.18 payment because h i s father-in-law has no claim a g a i n s t him f o r such amount. This argument i s beside t h e point. The D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t order a p p e l l a n t t o pay h i s father-in-law, b u t ordered these payments t o be made t o respondent, M r s . Dahl, s o t h a t she can l i v e up t o an agree- ment she has with her f a t h e r t o pay t h e s e amounts back t o him. Appellant's argument begs t h e i s s u e because Dahl had been ordered t o make t h e house payments and t o pay M r s . ~ a h l alimony, which he has f a i l e d t o do. F i n a l l y , a p p e l l a n t c i t e s W i l l i a m s v. Budke (19801, Mont. , 606 P.2d 515, 37 St.Rep. 228, a l l e g i n g t h a t t h i s c a s e supports h i s argument t h a t respondent's remedy was t o use t h e s t a t u t e s r e l a t i n g t o c o l l e c t i n g on judgments f o r accrued obligations. W i l l i a m s does n o t stand f o r t h e prin- c i p l e t h a t a person seeking a judgment on a delinquent o b l i g a t i o n i n a divorce a c t i o n i s l i m i t e d t o only one remedy. The Court i n t h a t case noted t h a t t h e r e a r e various means of enforcing o r d e r s d i r e c t i n g t h e payment of support money and o b l i g a t i o n s of divorce. I t i s proper f o r t h e District Court, a s was done here, t o determine how much w a s owed and t o e n t e r a judgment f o r such amount; i n s o doing t h e c o u r t avoids d u p l i c i t y of proceedings. A s noted i n t h e conclusion of respondent's b r i e f , t h i s has been a long divorce proceeding t o say t h e least. The p a r t i e s were divorced i n 1974; it is now 1980. I t i s t i m e t h a t t h e matter be l a i d t o rest and t h e proceedings be f i n a l l y concluded i n t h e i n t e r e s t of j u s t i c e . The D i s t r i c t Court properly decided t h e i s s u e s appezled flom and i t s decision i s hereby affirmed. I W e concur: PA&$% 4 i e f J u s t i c e