Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 0-258 / 09-1578 Filed May 26, 2010 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RAQUEL LYNN CHIPOKAS AND MARK LEWIS CHIPOKAS Upon the Petition of RAQUEL LYNN CHIPOKAS, Petitioner-Appellant, And Concerning MARK LEWIS CHIPOKAS, Defendant-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, L. Vern Robinson, Judge.

Raquel Chipokas appeals from the custodial and alimony provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Mark Chipokas. AFFIRMED.

Timothy S. White and Laura A. Kamienski of White Law Firm, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant. Allison M. Heffern and Kerry A. Finley of Simmons Perrine Moyer Bergman P.L.C., Coralville, for appellee.

Heard by Vaitheswaran, P.J., Doyle, J., and Schechtman, S.J.*
*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2009).

2

SCHECHTMAN, S.J. Raquel "Rocky" Chipokas appeals from the custodial and alimony provisions of the decree dissolving her marriage to Mark Chipokas. She

contends the court erred in granting them shared care of their children and not awarding her their physical care. Rocky further asserts error for the court's

refusal to award her spousal support. Both parties request an award of their appellate attorney fees. We affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. Rocky and Mark were married in their hometown, Cedar Rapids, in the summer of 1994. They are the parents of two daughters: Courtney, now thirteen and in seventh grade, and Ashley, a fourth grader and now ten years old. Rocky is currently forty years of age and Mark is forty-six. Rocky earned a bachelor's degree in communications, with a minor in psychology, from the University of Iowa. She has been gainfully employed since her graduation in 1992. Her ultimate goal was to be a sales representative for a pharmaceutical manufacturer, which she achieved in 1998. She left that firm after five years for a similar position with Bristol-Myers Squibb. Rocky serves an eastern Iowa territory, logging about one thousand miles of travel weekly. She principally calls on psychiatrists and some primary care physicians, promoting an anti-psychotic drug. She earns approximately $118,000 per year, which includes family medical/dental insurance and retirement benefits. She is also provided with a vehicle that is driven for personal use for a small monthly stipend. Rocky has suffered from marital stress in the past, diagnosed as an adjustment disorder

3

with depressed mood and anxiety.

An anti-depressant medication has given

relief. Otherwise, she enjoys good health. Mark is a 1989 graduate of the University of Iowa law school and has been a sole practitioner in Cedar Rapids since 1993, focusing on workers ' compensation and personal injury, with a dusting of criminal defense. His net income for the last five years has averaged $140,000 per year. Mark and his brother jointly own three real estate holding companies with a combined equitable value of about $100,000 for Mark's share. The parties constructed a large new home in 2003, which added some stress in Rocky's life. Rocky filed a petition for dissolution in July 2008.

Separation ensued, followed by some attempts at reconciliation, with Mark finally leaving the residence in April 2009. In response to a motion for temporary orders, the district court (not the trial court) established "shared physical care" on a temporary basis in late June, 2009. It then amended that temporary order without an evidentiary hearing, to award physical care temporarily to Rocky after school began, with routine visitation to Mark. This latter order was in place only three weeks until trial started in mid-September.1 The dissolution decree followed on September 29, 2009, which awarded joint legal custody, then granted joint physical physical care of the two children, alternating their care weekly. The court declined to award spousal support or attorney fees to either party.

1

Rocky asked for primary physical care at trial, while Mark requested shared physical care.

4

II. Scope and Standard of Review. Our review of dissolution of marriage controversies is de novo. In re Marriage of Brown, 776 N.W.2d 644, 647 (Iowa 2009). "Although we decide the issues raised on appeal anew, we give weight to the trial court's factual findings, especially with respect to the credibility of the witnesses." Id. (citations omitted). Because our determination depends on the facts of a particular case, precedent is of little value. Id. III. Child Custody. In child custody cases the first and governing

consideration is the best interests of the children. Iowa Code

Download IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RAQUEL LYNN CHIPOKAS AND MARK LEWIS CHIPOKAS Upon the Peti

Iowa Law