Court Opinion

ID: 9883482
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 01:43:32.277498+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:23.736698
License: Public Domain

Harwell, Justice
(dissenting):
I would remand for the purpose of requiring the lower court to make specific findings of fact as to which debts were incurred for the joint benefit of the parties during the marriage and then equitably apportion said marital indebtedness. I do not believe you can equitably divide the assets of the parties without requiring both parties to assume some portion of the debts which were incurred for their mutual benefit. The majority opinion rightly points out that it is always proper for the judge to take into consideration the debts of both of the parties as well as the properties of the parties in decreeing equitable distribution. The problem in this instance is that there are no findings of fact which indicate that the judge considered all of the marital debts in decreeing equitable division.
Ness, J., concurs.