Preview:

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

FILED
Nov 18 2011, 8:22 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: MARIELENA DUERRING South Bend, Indiana

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: MARK S. LENYO South Bend, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
BECKY MELTON, Appellant-Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL MELTON, Appellee-Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 71A03-1105-DR-217

APPEAL FROM THE ST. JOSEPH SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable David C. Chapleau, Judge Cause No. 71D06-0912-DR-651

November 18, 2011

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

KIRSCH, Judge

Becky Melton ("Wife") appeals from the trial court's order denying in part and granting in part her motion to correct error and for reconsideration of its decree of dissolution of Wife's marriage to Michael Melton ("Husband"). Wife presents the following restated issue for our review: whether the trial court abused its discretion in its division of property. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Beginning in 1990, Husband and Wife lived together in Granger, Indiana, in a home Husband previously had built and received as his property in a prior dissolution. Husband and Wife kept their finances separate until their marriage in September 1996,1 with Husband making the mortgage payments and paying for all of the utilities until the couple subscribed to cable television for which Wife paid. Wife also paid for the couple's groceries and telephone bills. In1985, Husband had begun construction of the home in which they lived, building it himself, but using subcontractors for the electrical and plumbing work. Husband paid for all of the construction of the home prior to living there with Wife and obtained a construction loan in order to finish the home. When Wife moved in, she bought curtains and wallpaper for three of the bedrooms. Husband had already planted the front lawn on the property, and Wife helped Husband install a sprinkler system. In 2003, during Husband and Wife's marriage, the property, which was titled in Husband's name, was sold and Husband received $181,826 in net sales proceeds. All of the

1

No children were born of Husband and Wife's marriage.

2

proceeds from the sale of property were used to construct Husband and Wife's current home in North Liberty, Indiana. Husband and Wife had purchased twenty acres of property adjacent to Wife's parents' property in 2001, but construction of the new marital residence did not begin until Spring 2004. During the construction of the new home, Husband and Wife lived with Wife's aunt, and Wife made the rent and utilities payments. Husband paid for the construction of the new house. At the time Wife filed her petition for dissolution of the marriage, the marital residence and property had equity of $230,961. In the dissolution proceedings, Wife asked to be awarded the marital residence because of its proximity to her parents' home, which made it easier for her to help care for her parents. Husband wanted to be awarded the marital residence and property because he had built the house as his retirement home, and had constructed a 2,000-square-foot shop with 12-foot ceilings in which he worked on restoring an automobile and did woodworking projects. Husband maintained the 2

Download Becky Melton v. Michael Melton.pdf

Indiana Law