Opinion ID: 884035
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Did the District Court err in allocating the Meeks' farm to Alan, rather than dividing the farm between the parties?

Text: Linda alleges that the District Court erred in allocating the entire farm to Alan, rather than dividing it and giving each party half. Specifically, she contends that the District Court's finding that [i]t [was] not economically prudent to split the farm is erroneous. As noted above, the District Court's findings of fact will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. DeWitt, 905 P.2d at 1087. Moreover, this Court has repeatedly recognized the long-standing public policy in Montana of keeping farms intact, if possible. Tonne, 733 P.2d 1280; In re Marriage of Glass (1985), 215 Mont. 248, 697 P.2d 96. Alan expressed a desire to farm full-time after he retires from his job and, someday, to leave the farm to his son. Linda does not require the farm for her continued financial security, nor does the District Court's refusal to partition this asset prevent her from receiving an equitable portion of the marital estate. The District Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to divide the farm.