Court Opinion

ID: 9670838
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:26:58.714299+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:06.790982
License: Public Domain

SACKETT, Judge
(dissenting).
I dissent. I would affirm the trial court.
The question is whether the trial court made an equitable division of the assets of a twenty-year marriage.
Carol has appealed contending the allocation of assets, $192,000 to her and $161,000 to Richard, is not equitable. Carol contends she is entitled to a larger share because her earnings during the marriage exceeded Richard’s. She was more frugal than Richard and for some seven years, the parties lived in separate states. Richard contends the allocation is fair, the Iowa courts have not allocated mantal assets according to a percentage to spousal earnings and though the parties lived in separate states, they remained married and in continual contact with each other and he supported her in career advancements. Richard did not cross-appeal, but had contended at the trial court level that there should have been a more equal division.
While Carol’s earnings have exceeded Richard’s earnings, the trial court rejected Carol’s contention this entitled her to a larger share of the assets and said of Carol’s position, “[I]f Iowa courts were to adopt the position urged by Carol, in the more common circumstance where the husband’s earnings are higher, sometimes substantially higher, than the wife’s, the wife would be left in tenuous financial circumstances.” I agree with the trial court’s conclusion.
Approaching the issue from a gender-neutral position, see In re Marriage of Bethke, 484 N.W.2d 604, 608 (Iowa App.1992), I find the trial court did equity and I would affirm.