Summary
The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed a divorce judgment involving valuation and equitable division of marital property. The court upheld the classification of the marriage as long-term, the valuation and allocation of farmland and a salon business, inclusion of jointly titled property in the marital estate, division of a retirement account, and a 4% interest rate on equalization payments.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court clearly erred by treating the marriage as long-term for purposes of dividing the marital estate.
- Whether the district court clearly erred in valuing the inherited farmland and the salon.
- Whether the district court clearly erred by awarding Kelli a reciprocal share of the inherited farmland's value rather than returning the farmland's value solely to Chad.
- Whether the district court clearly erred by including Chad's interest in the jointly titled home in the marital estate.
- Whether the district court clearly erred in awarding Kelli a portion of Chad's NDPERS retirement account and in otherwise equally dividing the marital estate.
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by applying a 4% interest rate to the post-judgment equalization payments.
Holdings
- There is no bright-line rule distinguishing short-term and long-term marriages. A district court may consider premarital cohabitation and the period between commencement of divorce proceedings and entry of the final decree when assessing the duration of the relationship for property-distribution purposes.
- The district court did not clearly err in valuing the farmland or the salon.
- The district court did not clearly err by awarding Chad the farmland while requiring a reciprocal allocation of its value to Kelli as part of an equal division of the marital estate.
- Property held jointly by Chad and his father was properly included in the marital estate to the extent of Chad's one-half ownership interest.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by applying a 4% interest rate to the post-judgment equalization payments.
Key quotations
“There is no bright-line rule to distinguish between short and long-term marriages.” (¶ 10)
“When a distribution of property includes periodic cash payments from one spouse to another, a district court has broad authority to provide for the payment of interest in order to achieve an equitable distribution of the property.” (¶ 29)
Factual background
Chad and Kelli Schultz cohabited for approximately one and one-half years, married in September 2008, separated in February 2016, and were divorced in January 2018. The marital estate included inherited farmland, a salon, a jointly titled home in which Chad's father resided, retirement accounts, and other property. The district court treated the marriage as long-term, valued the disputed assets, divided the estate equally, and ordered Chad to make equalization payments to Kelli with 4% interest.
Procedural history
The district court entered a final judgment and decree of divorce on January 17, 2018. It determined the marriage was long-term, valued and equitably divided the marital estate, included Chad's interest in property jointly titled with his father, ordered a qualified domestic relations order for the NDPERS account, and required Chad to make post-judgment equalization payments bearing 4% interest. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed.