Preview:

Williams v. Miles
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA September 1997 Term _____________ No. 24028 _____________ LARRY K. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. STELLA LYNN (WILLIAMS) MILES, Defendant Below, Appellant. ____________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court of Webster County Honorable Danny O. Cline, Judge Civil Action No. 88-D-17 AFFIRMED ____________________________________________________________________ Submitted: September 16, 1997 Filed: December 15, 1997 William W. Talbott Howard J. Blyler Webster Springs, West Virginia Cowen, West Virginia Attorney for Appellant Attorney for Appellee The opinion of the Court was delivered PER CURIAM. CHIEF JUSTICE WORKMAN dissents and reserves the right to file a dissenting opinion. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. "In reviewing challenges to findings made by a family law master that also were adopted by a circuit court, a three-pronged standard of review is applied. Under these circumstances, a final equitable distribution order is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard; the underlying factual findings are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard; and questions of law and statutory interpretations are subject to a de novo review." Syl. Pt. 1, Burnside v. Burnside, 194 W.Va. 263, 460 S.E.2d 264 (1995). 2. "A family law master lacks jurisdiction to hear a petition for modification of an order when the modification proceeding does not involve child custody, child visitation, child support or spousal support. W.Va.Code, 48A-4-1(i)(4) [1986]." Syl. Pt. 1, Segal v. Beard, 181 W.Va. 92, 380 S.E.2d 444 (1989). 3. "A circuit court lacks jurisdiction under W.Va.Code, 48-2-15(e) [1986] to modify a divorce decree when the modification proceeding does not involve alimony, child support or child custody." Syl. Pt. 2, Segal v. Beard, 181
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/24028.html[7/1/2013 8:31:59 PM]

W.Va. 92, 380 S.E.2d 444 (1989). Per Curiam:See footnote 1 1 This appeal arises from an order of the Circuit Court of Webster County denying the claim of Stella Lynn Williams, the appellant/defendant, that she receive one-half of accrued overtime pay that was not previously made part of the final divorce decree. The appellant alleges it was error for the circuit court to rule that the family law master lacked jurisdiction to hear the claim. The appeal also asserts that the Court erred in its ruling that she failed to establish grounds necessary to alter the final divorce order. We affirm. I. On December 13, 1989, a final divorce decree was entered dissolving the marriage of Stella Lynn Williams to Larry K. Williams, appellee/plaintiff. Part of the final decree incorporated a settlement agreement. Approximately 5 years after the divorce was finalized, Mr. Williams received an award of $19,749.93 from a civil action involving overtime pay for state troopers. The overtime pay was earned during the marriage. In February 1995, Stella Lynn Williams filed a petition to require an accounting for one-half of the overtime pay Mr. Williams received. Stella Lynn Williams' petition stated that the overtime award was not disclosed during the parties' divorce and therefore the final order must be vacated due to the mistake. The family law master recommended the overtime award be defined as marital property and subject to equitable distribution. The circuit court rejected the recommendation. In doing so, the circuit court ruled that under the applicable law in place at the time of the divorce, W.Va. Code

Download 24028.pdf

West Virginia Law