Opinion
No. 30713.
2014-03-13
Estrellita Gay TIMON, Plaintiff–Appellee/Cross–Appellant, v. Neal Jackson TIMON, Defendant–Appellant/Cross–Appellee.
However, I do agree that the basis for reaching the $65,000 figure the family court used in this case to reduce the equalization payment was unclear. While the family court identified a number of factors for this reduction, including the relative ages of the parties, the respective needs of the parties, that a significant portion of the assets credited to Husband were prior expenditures made by Husband and Wife had more in liquid assets, no dollar amounts were attributed to any of these factors. Thus, I agree that this case should be remanded for more detailed findings providing the basis for its reduction of the equalization payment.