Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2432 SEPTEM BER TERM, 2007 ______________________________________

ANTHONY MURRAY vs. TERESA MURRAY

______________________________________ Eyler, James R., Zarnoch, Sharer, J. Frederick (Retired, Specially Assigned), JJ. ______________________________________ Opinion by Sharer, J. ______________________________________ Filed: February 24, 2010

The parties to this appeal, appellant, Anthony Murray, and appellee, Teresa Murray, were divorced absolutely by judgment of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, entered on September 19, 2007. Of primary concern in this appeal is the trial court's disposition of marital property, particularly its treatment of funds received by Teresa in settlement of an employment discrimination claim. In his appeal, Anthony presents four questions for our consideration, which we have distilled and rephrased as:1 1. Whether the trial court erred in ruling that proceeds from Teresa's employment discrimination claim were not marital property. 2. Whether the trial court erred in its unequal division of the proceeds of the sale of the marital home.

1

In his opening brief, appellant asks:

1. Did the trial court err when it found that appellant failed to produce evidence that the money received by appellee in settlement of her employment discrimination claim was property acquired during the marriage, and failed to produce evidence of the value of that property? 2. Did the trial court err when it limited cross examination on the issue of economic loss claimed by Mrs. Murray in her employment discrimination complaint, and when it found it could not allocate the settlement award into various components of damages? 3. Did Mrs. Murray fail to meet her burden of proof, and did the trial court err when it failed to find all the proceeds of the settlement to be marital property? 4. Did the trial court err when it effectively granted Mrs. Murray a $13,000 monetary award?

For the reasons that follow, we shall vacate the judgment of the circuit court and remand this matter for further appropriate proceedings. FACTS and PROCEEDINGS 2 Anthony Murray and Teresa Murray (the plaintiff below) were married on May 20, 1998. They are the parents of two children, ages ten and four at the time of the trial.3 Both parties were employed: Teresa as an attorney, Anthony as a clerk with the Internal Revenue Service. The litigation was initiated by Teresa's complaint for absolute or limited divorce on the ground of constructive desertion. Anthony answered and filed a counter-complaint alleging desertion. Ultimately, the parties stipulated, and the trial court found, that they had voluntarily lived separate and apart, without interruption, for 12 months prior to August 16, 2006. The divorce was granted on that ground. 1. The Employment Discrimination Settlement

Download Murray v. Murray.pdf

Maryland Law