Preview:

FILED: February 23, 2012 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of the Marriage of BLAIR ELGIN BAILEY, Petitioner-Respondent, and KATHY G. BAILEY, Respondent-Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 09DO0156DS A145725

Thomas M. Hull, Judge. Argued and submitted on October 03, 2011. Jeffrey E. Potter argued the cause for appellant. With him on the opening brief was Gardner, Honsowetz, Potter, Budge & Ford. With him on the reply brief was Gardner, Potter, Budge, Spickard & Cascagnette. George W. Kelly argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Brewer, Chief Judge, and Hadlock, Judge. BREWER, C. J. On appeal, reversed and remanded for entry of judgment (1) awarding wife transitional support of $1,500 and maintenance support of $5,500 for 18 months, so that the total spousal support award for that period will be $7,000 per month; (2) for the next six years, the maintenance support award shall be $6,000 per month; and (3) thereafter, the maintenance support award shall be $4,000 per month, which will continue indefinitely. In addition; the judgment shall be modified to require husband to maintain his existing whole life insurance policy in the amount of $350,000 with wife named as primary beneficiary until his spousal support obligation is fulfilled; otherwise affirmed.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

BREWER, C. J. Wife appeals a dissolution judgment, arguing that the trial court erred in (1) awarding wife too little maintenance spousal support; (2) not requiring husband to maintain wife as a beneficiary on his whole life insurance policy until his spousal support obligation is fulfilled; and (3) dividing the parties' property in a manner that was not just and proper in all the circumstances. Because the notice of appeal in this case was filed after the effective date of the 2009 amendments to ORS 19.415(3), we have discretion whether to review the facts de novo.1 However, neither party has sought de novo review, and we perceive no reason to exercise our discretion to conduct such a review. As explained below, we modify the spousal support award and husband's life insurance obligation, and otherwise affirm. We state the pertinent facts as the trial court found them and as supplemented by our review of the record. The parties were married for 24 years. At the
1

ORS 19.415(3) (2007) provided that, in equitable cases, "the Court of Appeals shall try the cause anew upon the record." That provision was amended in 2009, making de novo review discretionary in cases where the notice of appeal was filed after June 4, 2009. See Or Laws 2009, ch 231,

Download A145725 Bailey and Bailey.pdf

Oregon Law