Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 1-499 / 10-1745 Filed July 27, 2011

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TIMOTHY JOSEPH SCHUSTER AND LORI SUSAN SCHUSTER Upon the Petition of TIMOTHY JOSEPH SCHUSTER, Petitioner-Appellee, And Concerning LORI SUSAN SCHUSTER, Respondent-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg, Judge.

Lori Schuster appeals from the economic provisions of the parties dissolution decree. AFFIRMED.

Michael B. Oliver of Oliver Law Firm, P.C., Windsor Heights, for appellant. Theodore P. Sporer of Sporer & Flanagan, P.L.L.C., Des Moines, for appellee.

Considered by Eisenhauer, P.J., and Potterfield and Tabor, JJ.

2 POTTERFIELD, J. Lori Schuster appeals from the economic provisions of the parties dissolution decree. Because we find no failure to do equity, we affirm. I. Background Facts. Lori and Timothy Schuster were married about thirty months before they separated. They have no children together. During their marriage, about

$10,500 was given to Loris daughter out of the couples joint account for her room and board at school. A Pontiac Grand Am purchased during the marriage was given to Loris daughter. Timothys son received a Chevy Cavalier.

Timothys daughter is driving the 2003 Honda vehicle Lori brought to the marriage. Each came into the marriage with investment or retirement accounts. At the time of dissolution, Loris accounts had declined in value, while Timothys Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) account had increased in value. Timothy contributed $413 per month to his IPERS account at the time of trial. At the time of the dissolution trial, Loris net monthly income was about $4100; Timothys net monthly income was about $4600. Lori owned a home before she and Timothy were married. The mortgage payments for that house during the marriage were paid from the couples joint account. They did some remodeling with Timothy providing some of the labor. Prior to the dissolution trial, the house was sold and Lori received all the proceeds from the sale. With those proceeds, Lori placed a $30,000 down payment on a new residence solely in her name and paid $17,000 toward the debt owed on a 2009 Civic purchased earlier.

3 Two credit cards (a Chase card and a Discover card) were used by Lori and Timothy during the marriage, both with Lori as the sole responsible party and Timothy as an authorized user. Loris cosmetic surgery charges ($11,600) were placed on the Chase credit card. Timothys 1993 Harley Davidson FXR

motorcycle was paid off with this card as well ($3338). The parties paid about $12,500 on the Chase card during the marriage, but at the time of trial more than $14,000 was still owed. In its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and dissolution decree, the district court emphasized the short duration of the marriage in determining no spousal support was warranted, and awarding each party their personal retirement and investment accounts. The court awarded Timothy two

motorcycles (a 2008 Harley Davidson was purchased during the marriage, which at the time of trial was encumbered by a loan in excess of $9000). Lori was awarded two cars (the 2009 Civic and the 2003 Honda she brought to the marriage) and the new residence. The court ordered Timothy to pay the debt on a Military Star credit card and $3000 toward the debt on the Chase credit card. Lori was responsible for the remainder owing on the Chase and Discover cards. The court declined to award Lori attorney fees. Lori now appeals, contending the distribution of debts is inequitable. She also argues the court erred in not awarding her a portion of Timothys IPERS account or attorney fees. II. Standard of Review. We review dissolution cases de novo. In re Marriage of Sullins, 715

N.W.2d 242, 247 (Iowa 2006). Although we decide the issues raised on appeal

4 anew, we give weight to the trial courts factual findings, especially with respect to the credibility of the witnesses. Id. III. Property Division. Lori complains the court should have awarded her a portion of Timothys IPERS account as its value increased some $70,000 during the marriage. "Pensions are divisible marital property." Sullins, 715 N.W.2d at 247.

Indeed, all property of the marriage that exists at the time of the divorce, other than gifts and inheritances to one spouse, is divisible property. Id.; see Iowa Code

Download IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF TIMOTHY JOSEPH SCHUSTER AND LORI SUSAN SCHUSTER Upon the P

Iowa Law