- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Family Law
- Date Filed: 12-05-2012
- Case #: A145281
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Brewer, J. for the Court; Armstrong, P.J.; and Duncan, J.
Husband appealed a court ordered property and debt division resulting from his marriage dissolution. Husband requested a de novo review of the trial court鈥檚 facts. On appeal, the Court focused on whether the property division was 鈥渏ust and proper in all the circumstances鈥 as required by ORS 107.105(1)(f). Husband asserted that the trial court ignored his contributions to assets acquired in his Wife鈥檚 name. However, the trial court made findings that Husband was fully compensated for work completed on behalf of his wife and that the parties meticulously avoided commingling their debts and assets. Based on these findings, the trial court awarded each party their own separately held assets and liabilities. Although there were inaccuracies in the trial court鈥檚 asset calculations, Husband did not demonstrate that a 鈥渏ust and proper鈥 distribution would require giving him a greater share of the assets than he was awarded. The division was not inequitable. Affirmed.