Opinion ID: 2548945
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Division of Assets Outside the Trusts

Text: Goodlander further argues that the trial court should have taken into account Tamposi's interest in the EMT Trust when dividing the non-trust assets and awarded him all of the parties' non-trust assets to offset the interest Tamposi has in the EMT Trust that cannot be assigned to him. In support of this argument, Goodlander cites Lawlor v. Lawlor, 123 N.H. 163, 459 A.2d 238 (1983), and In the Matter of Hampers & Hampers, 154 N.H. 275, 911 A.2d 14 (2006), for the proposition that assets outside of the marital property that are held by one party are properly considered by the trial court in dividing the marital property. We find both Lawlor and Hampers distinguishable. In Lawlor, the husband's vested, though undistributed, legacy under a deceased parent's will was properly considered by the trial court in dividing the parties' marital assets. Lawlor, 123 N.H. at 165-66, 459 A.2d 238. As noted above, Tamposi's interest in any future distributions from the EMT Trust is only a mere expectancy. Similarly, in Hampers, the husband had power over a revocable trust worth an estimated 15 million dollars, which he created during the course of the marriage. Hampers, 154 N.H. at 278, 911 A.2d 14. In dividing the parties' marital assets, the trial court properly took into account the husband's interest in the trust, which was plainly more than a mere expectancy. Id. at 285-86, 911 A.2d 14. As we afford trial courts broad discretion in determining matters of property distribution in fashioning a final divorce decree, we will not overturn the trial court's decision absent an unsustainable exercise of discretion. Id. at 285, 911 A.2d 14. If the court's findings can reasonably be made on the evidence presented, they will stand. Id. (quotation omitted). Here, the trial court properly refused to take into account potential future distributions from the EMT Trust, and concluded that but for the remaining debts related to the funds taken from the children's custodial accounts ... [,] an essentially equal division [of the marital property] is fair. See RSA 564-B:8-814(b). Given all the circumstances, we do not conclude that the trial court erred in declining to award Goodlander the entirety of the parties' assets. We note that Goodlander challenges the trial court's finding that the non-trust assets were acquired by Tamposi primarily by gift or inheritance from her father. He notes that several witnesses testified that a number of Tamposi's non-trust assets were neither given to her nor inherited. Thus, Goodlander asserts the trial judge erred in dividing the non-trust assets in only a 51/49% formula because [the trial court] thought the bulk of them came by gift from Ms. Tamposi's father. We find no error. Whether the assets owned by Tamposi were gifts, inherited or earned, the trial court specifically stated that considered in context of all the evidence, the Court does not conclude the source of [the non-trust] assets warrants an uneven split. On the record before us, we do not find that the trial court unsustainably exercised its discretion in dividing the marital assets.