Preview:

RENDERED: March 3, 2000; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

C ommonwealth O f K entucky C ourt O f A ppeals
NO. 1999-CA-000459-MR

ELWOOD SERGENT

APPELLANT

v.

APPEAL FROM BOYD CIRCUIT COURT HONORABLE KELLEY ASBURY, JUDGE ACTION NO. 92-CI-00833

MARY LYNN MONTAGUE

APPELLEE

OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: GUDGEL, CHIEF JUDGE; COMBS AND MILLER, JUDGES. Elwood Sergent brings this appeal from a February We affirm.

MILLER, JUDGE:

10, 1999 Order of the Boyd Circuit Court.

The parties were divorced by Decree of Dissolution entered September 30, 1993 by the Boyd Circuit Court. appellant was ordered to satisfy marital debts of some $39,000.00. Appellant failed to do so. In an effort to force Therein,

compliance with the divorce decree, appellee: (1) obtained personal judgments against appellant, (2) had him held in contempt of court, (3) had an order of arrest issued, and (4) sought his military retirement. unsatisfactory. All efforts proved

On January 20, 1999, the domestic relations Therein, the

commissioner entered a report and recommendation.

commissioner noted that appellee "has asked the Court to <in effect' change the label of this judgment from one for marital debts to an order of spousal support." Appellant resisted an

award of maintenance arguing that appellee was "estopped from raising this issue." The commissioner ultimately awarded

appellee maintenance in the amount of $56,165.13, representing the unsatisfied debt with interest. thereto. Appellant filed exceptions

On February 10, 1999, the Boyd Circuit Court entered an

Order overruling the exceptions to the commissioner's report and adopting same. This appeal follows.

Appellant's sole issue on appeal is that the circuit court committed reversible error by awarding appellant maintenance more than five years after entry of the original decree of dissolution. We disagree.

The domestic relations commissioner's report found as follows: It appears from the record that the Petitioner did not request maintenance, as the Respondent was responsible for a just proportion of the marital debts. However, Respondent failed to pay these obligations, and the Petitioner ultimately became responsible for the Respondent's portion of the marital debt. . . . 1. A judgment in the amount of $42,379.32 was entered against the Respondent on May 24, 1995. This amount reflected the various marital debts that the Respondent was ordered to pay in September, 1993. A garnishment resulted in collection of $1,679.95 toward the judgment on November 14, 1995. Since November 14, 1995, there have been no additional payments on the debt, and the interest has accrued at the legal rate of

-2-

12%, resulting in a current amount of $56,165.13 due and owing the Petitioner. 2. Based upon the philosophy that led to the changes in 11 U.S.C.

Download 1999-ca-000459.pdf

Kentucky Law