Opinion
June 27, 1972.
Editorial Note:
This case has been marked 'not for publication' by the court.
Murphy, Morris & Murphy, David H. Morris, Colorado Springs, for plaintiff-appellant.
Evans, Peterson & Torbet, Paul V. Evans, Colorado Springs, for defendant-appellee.
SILVERSTEIN, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff (wife) appeals from final orders on division of property entered subsequent to a decree which granted a divorce to each of the parties. The only contention raised on appeal is that the trial court's findings were contrary to the evidence and an abuse of discretion. We affirm the trial court.
The marriage of the parties, which lasted about eight years, was a second marriage for both parties. No children were born of this marriage. Both parties owned property at the time of their marriage, most of which remained their separate property during the marriage.
Although there was testimony at the hearing on final orders relative to the various assets of the parties, the issue on appeal relates solely to certain real estate owned by the husband at the time of marriage, which was of relatively small value at that time. However, during the marriage it was developed by the joint efforts of the parties into a mobile home park which at the time of the hearing had an appraised value of $70,000.
The evidence disclosed that there were encumbrances against the property. The trial court found that the net value of the property was $40,000. The court further determined that the wife was entitled overall to a property award of the value of $20,000. Due to the encumbrances against the mobile home park, the court, instead of dividing that parcel to satisfy the award, ordered the husband to pay the wife $20,000 in cash, less certain credits for other assets awarded to the wife.
The wife asserts that there was not sufficient evidence to support the court's finding that the encumbrances against the mobile home park were valid. The testimony relative to these encumbrances was conflicting. However, their existence and validity was not refuted by any competent evidence. Taken as a whole, the record supports the findings and order of the trial court. Therefore they will not be disturbed. Moats v. Moats, 168 Colo. 120, 450 P.2d 64.
Judgment affirmed.
DWYER and ENOCH, JJ., concur.