Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 8-628 / 08-0418 Filed September 17, 2008 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BARBARA C. POWELL AND JOHN THOMSEN POWELL Upon the Petition of BARBARA C. POWELL, Petitioner-Appellee, And Concerning JOHN THOMSEN POWELL, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Artis Reis, Judge.

John Thomsen Powell appeals from the district court's denial of his petition to modify the spousal support, child support, and uncovered medical expenses provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Barbara Powell. REVERSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

Andrew B. Howie of Hudson, Mallaney & Shindler, P.C., West Des Moines, for appellant. Catherine C. Dietz-Kilen, Des Moines, for appellee.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Miller and Potterfield, JJ.

2

MILLER, J. John Thomsen Powell (Thom) appeals from the district court's denial of his petition to modify the spousal support, child support, and uncovered medical expenses provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Barbara Powell. We affirm in part, affirm in part as modified, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS. Thom and Barbara Powell were divorced in May 2005. They have two minor children together, Brandon, born in December 1991, and Kelsey, born in September 1993. In the stipulated dissolution decree, the children were placed in the physical care of Barbara. Thom was ordered to pay child support to

Barbara in the amount of $1500 per month.1 He was also ordered to maintain medical insurance for the minor children and to pay a portion of the children's uncovered medical expenses. Finally, he was ordered to pay Barbara $2100 per month in spousal support, beginning June 1, 2005, and continuing for forty-eight months, at which time his obligation would be reduced to $1000 per month for an additional forty-eight months, or until "Barbara's remarriage, cohabitation with an unrelated male, or the death of either party." When the parties divorced, Thom was employed as an organizational excellence leader at Meredith Corporation. His starting salary at Meredith in 2004 was $115,000. He also earned discretionary annual bonuses, which

1

In setting Thom's child support obligation, the parties agreed to attribute an "annual alimony [income] of $25,200 to Barbara and an annual salary of $115,000 to Thom, less alimony payments of $25,200."

3

resulted in a gross annual income of $141,563 in 2004, $146,804 in 2005, and $145,581 in 2006. He maintained medical insurance for the parties' children through his employer-provided plan at Meredith. On March 30, 2007, Thom, along with sixty other employees, lost his job at Meredith due to downsizing by the company. He shortly thereafter filed a petition to modify the dissolution decree, asserting that as a result of a substantial change in circumstances his child support obligation should be reduced, the medical insurance provisions of the decree should be modified, and his spousal support obligation should be terminated or substantially reduced. At trial on his petition he relied on his loss of his employment at Meredith and resulting reduction in income, as well as a claim that Barbara was cohabiting with an unrelated male. Thom's petition to modify the dissolution decree came before the district court for trial in November 2007. At the time of the modification trial, Thom was fifty-one years old and in good health. He has a bachelor's degree in business administration and a master's degree in management science. He has over twenty-eight years of work experience in "education, development and [human resource] leadership." After he lost his job at Meredith, he began an extensive job search, making "over 300 contacts to fellow human resource professionals and training and development professionals in town." Unfortunately, he was

unable to secure a job at the same level of income he enjoyed at Meredith. He eventually accepted a position in August 2007 at Career Resources Group (CRG) as vice president of leadership consulting for $68,000 per year plus

4

possible bonuses and sales commissions. insurance plan to its employees.

CRG does not offer a medical

Barbara was forty-nine years old and in good health at the time of the modification hearing. After she graduated from high school in 1976, she began working at a bank where she remained employed until 1989. She was earning $33,567 per year when she left her position as manager of retail banking for that bank in 1989. She stayed at home with the parties' children for the remainder of her marriage to Thom. She took "a few college courses" when she worked at the bank but has had no other post-secondary education. After the parties'

dissolution, Barbara obtained a job with the Des Moines Public Schools earning approximately $13,000 annually. She works close to forty hours per week during the school year, and she does not work during the summer. Barbara's employer provides her with medical insurance for herself and her children at no cost to her. Following the close of the parties' evidence, the district court denied Thom's petition to modify in a ruling from the bench. The court determined there was not a substantial change in circumstances justifying a modification of either his spousal or child support obligations. The court rejected Thom's claims that Barbara was cohabiting with her boyfriend and that his reduced income was permanent in nature. In a written ruling entered in December 2007, the district court explained Thom had not proved a substantial change in circumstances justifying modification of his spousal and child support obligations because, "based upon [his] education, skills and experience . . . he is capable of continuing to earn at an

5

annual rate of at least $115,000." In a subsequent nunc pro tunc order, the court further stated "that using the former income of [Thom] in calculating child support is required to meet the needs of the children and to do justice between the parties." The court dismissed Thom's petition to modify and ordered him to pay $10,000 towards Barbara's trial attorney fees. Thom filed a motion to amend or enlarge the district court's ruling pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2). The court entered an amended ruling in February 2008, modifying the medical insurance provision of the dissolution decree by requiring Barbara to maintain medical insurance for the parties' children under certain circumstances and denying Thom's request to modify the percentage he pays for the children's uncovered medical expenses. Thom appeals. He claims the district court erred in denying his petition to modify the spousal support, child support, and uncovered medical expenses provisions of the parties' dissolution decree. He further claims the court abused its discretion in ordering him to pay Barbara's trial attorney fees. Both he and Barbara seek an award of appellate attorney fees. II. SCOPE AND STANDARDS OF REVIEW. This action for modification of a dissolution of marriage decree is an equity case. See Iowa Code

Download IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BARBARA C. POWELL AND JOHN THOMSEN POWELL Upon the Petiti

Iowa Law