Summary
This Delaware Supreme Court per curiam opinion affirms a Family Court judgment regarding equitable distribution of marital property and alimony between Marcy and Walter Samuels. The appellant-wife challenged several factual findings, including the characterization of bank accounts as marital property, the husband's income level, the inclusion of childcare expenses in his monthly obligations, and the effective date of alimony payments. The Court found no reversible error, noting that new evidence not presented below cannot be considered on appeal and that the Family Court acted within its broad discretion under applicable statutes.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Family Court’s misstatement that both parties were on the deed of the marital residence constitutes reversible error.
- Whether the TD Bank account number 0138 should be treated as marital property.
- Whether the Family Court erred in calculating alimony based on Husband’s income, childcare expenses, and the effective date of alimony.
- Whether the appellate court may consider evidence not part of the trial court record.
- Whether Husband is entitled to attorney’s fees.
Holdings
- The misstatement is a harmless error because it did not affect the outcome; the judgment is affirmed.
- The TD Bank account is marital property; the Court will not consider extrinsic bank records not presented to the Family Court.
- The use of the $101,731 figure is proper because it reflects the parties’ stipulation; no reversible error.
- The addition of a portion of childcare costs is within the Family Court’s broad discretion and does not constitute error.
- The change of effective date is proper; the Court’s authority to set the commencement date is affirmed.
- The Court may not consider such evidence; the record is limited to what was presented to the Family Court.
- Husband is not entitled to fees because the appeal was not frivolous and no motion for fees was filed.
Key quotations
“When a Family Court judge misstates a fact, but the misstated fact does not weigh significantly in his [...] analysis, the misstatement is considered harmless error.” (at *1)
“We will not disturb the Family Court’s rulings on appeal if the court’s findings of fact are supported by the record and its explanations, deductions, and inferences are the product of an orderly and logical reasoning process.” (402 A.2d at 1204)
Factual background
Marcy Samuels and Walter Samuels, IV married in 2008, separated in 2021 and divorced in 2022. The parties had no children. The Family Court ordered a 60/40 equitable distribution of the marital estate in favor of the wife and set alimony at $2,309 per month, later reduced to $1,834 after a reargument. Disputes arose over the deed to the marital residence, the characterization of a TD Bank account, the calculation of Husband’s income, inclusion of childcare expenses, and the effective date of alimony.
Procedural history
The Family Court issued an Ancillary Matters Decision on February 29, 2024 ordering a 60/40 property division and alimony of $2,309 per month. The Court later modified the order on July 2, 2024 reducing alimony to $1,834 and changing the effective date. Wife filed a pro se notice of appeal on January 10, 2025. The Supreme Court of Delaware reviewed the appeal and affirmed the Family Court’s judgment.