From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Marriage of Davis

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 26, 2005
707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-706 / 04-1725

Filed October 26, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Jon Stuart Scoles, Judge.

Gordon Davis appeals and Beverly Davis cross-appeals from the district court decree dissolving the parties' marriage. AFFIRMED.

Christopher F. O'Donohoe of Elwood, O'Donohoe, Stochl, Braun Churbuck, New Hampton, for appellant.

Ryan Rassmussan of Hagemann Goeke, Waverly, for appellee.

Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ.


Gordon Davis appeals and Beverly Davis cross-appeals from the district court decree dissolving the parties' nearly thirty-year marriage. Upon our de novo review, Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; In re Marriage of Wagner, 604 N.W.2d 605, 608 (Iowa 2000), we affirm the district court.

In the dissolution decree the court dealt with issues of custody and physical care of the parties' younger son, Luke, a postsecondary education subsidy for the parties' older son, Neal, and an attorney fee award, none of which are at issue on appeal. The court also settled contested issues regarding the amount of child support Gordon should be ordered to pay for Luke, division of the parties' assets and liabilities, and whether Beverly should be awarded spousal support. On appeal and cross-appeal the parties raise issues regarding Gordon's income and Beverly's income or earning capacity for the purpose of setting Gordon's child and spousal support obligations; whether Gordon should have been required to name Luke as a beneficiary on a policy insuring Gordon's life for as long as Gordon's child support obligation exists; whether the court erred in awarding Beverly traditional spousal support, and in setting the amount and duration of that support; and whether the court's nearly equal property division was equitable.

We have reviewed the thorough and detailed decree of the district court. The court's factual findings are supported by the record, its application of the law is correct, and its reasoning sound. We find nothing inequitable or erroneous in the district court's resolution of the contested issues. See Seymour v. Hunter, 603 N.W.2d 625, 626 (Iowa 1999) (unguaranteed and/or irregular income); In re Marriage of Lalone, 469 N.W.2d 695, 697 (Iowa 1991) (variance from child support guidelines); In re Marriage of Clinton, 579 N.W.2d 835, 839 (Iowa Ct.App. 1998) (spousal support); In re Marriage of Bonnette, 492 N.W.2d 717, 722 (Iowa Ct.App. 1992) (earning capacity); In re Marriage of Russell, 473 N.W.2d 244, 246 (Iowa Ct.App. 1991) (property division).

Gordon contends the court erred when it denied his motion to amend or enlarge pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2) on the basis the motion was untimely. We agree the rule 1.904(2) motion, which was placed in the United States mail on the tenth day following the filing of the dissolution decree, was timely filed. See Iowa Rs. Civ. P. 1.442, 1.904(2), 1.1007. However, the court's error in this regard was harmless. In relevant part, the motion challenged the district court's property division, and we have determined the division made by the court was equitable.

Beverly requests an award of appellate attorney fees. Such an award is discretionary and is determined by assessing the needs of the requesting party, the opposing party's ability to pay, and whether the requesting party was forced to defend the appeal. In re Marriage of Gaer, 476 N.W.2d 324, 330 (Iowa 1991). We decline to award Beverly attorney fees. The costs of this appeal are assessed one-half to each party.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

In re Marriage of Davis

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 26, 2005
707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

In re Marriage of Davis

Case Details

Full title:IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF BEVERLY J. DAVIS AND GORDON F. DAVIS. Upon the…

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Oct 26, 2005

Citations

707 N.W.2d 337 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)