Opinion ID: 883553
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: George raises the following issues on appeal: 1. Did the District Court err in finding that Deanna made a greater contribution in acquiring the marital assets? 2. Did the District Court err in requiring George to pay Deanna for lost rental income that could have been realized during their period of separation? 3. Did the District Court err in allowing Deanna to recover post-separation payments while not allowing George to do the same? 4. Did the District Court err in using different property values between its findings of fact and its conclusions of law? 5. Did the District Court err in awarding the family home to Deanna, rather than ordering its sale in an escalating market? 6. Did the District Court err in excluding Deanna's royalty receipts from the marital estate? 7. Did the District Court err in its distribution of George's pension benefits? We have reviewed the record and have considered the arguments and the authorities cited. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the District Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to issues 1, 3, 5, and 6, and accordingly, we decline to address these further. Issues 2, 4, and 7 require further consideration, however. I. Did the District Court err in requiring George to pay Deanna for lost rental income that could have been realized during their period of separation? 2 II. Did the District Court err in using different property values between its findings of fact and its conclusions of law? III. Did the District Court err in its distribution of George's pension benefits?