In Re the Marriage of Norine , 210 Mont. 477 ( 1984 )


Menu:
  •            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
    IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF
    LAURIE NORINE ,
    Petitioner and Respondent,
    and
    GARY A. NORINE,
    Respondent and Appellant.
    ORDER AND oPIMIoN        ZfL . Pffitj
    g         _X.Lpl;,ow
    GLERI< QF 6"clFWEPAE COURT
    gy4l-j-E OF PdhOrdfANA
    PER CURIAM:
    The husband appeals a division of marital property made
    by the Gallatin County District Court whereby his former wife
    received their house.
    The parties were married in 1973 and divorced in 1983.
    The trial court noted in its findings that the value of the
    personal. property acquired during marriage and in the posses-
    sion of the husband totaled $16,620.           The wife's personal
    property totaled $2,855.       The parties' residence and real
    estate was va.lued at $51,500, against which there was a
    mortgage    unpaid   of   $28,677.63   and    an   equity    paid      of
    $22,822.37.
    The court awarded the husband his personal property
    ($16,620) and the wife hers ($2,855).         The house was awarded
    to the wife (net value $22,822.37).
    We have been asked to decide whether the District Court
    failed to make a determination of the net worth of the par-
    ties at the time of dissolution.       Given the findings and our
    holding in In Re Marriage of Bosacker (Mont. 1 9 8 0 ) , 6 0 
    9 P.2d 253
    ,   37   St.Rep. 4 6 9 ,   appellant's argument is without merit.
    Appellant also argues that the distribution of property
    was inequitable.          This Court will not alter a District Court
    judgment resolving property divisions unless the lower court
    acted "arbitrarily without employment of conscientious judg-
    ment" or exceeded "the bounds of reason in view of all the
    circumstances. If         Stratford v. Stratford           (Mont. 1 9 8 1 )   ,   
    631 P.2d 296
    , 2 9 8 ,    38   St.Rep. 1 0 9 3 ,   1095.    The record discloses
    no such abuse of discretion.
    The appeal. is without merit and is denied summarily.
    DATED this %day             of May, 1 9 8 4 .
    '%wdLd             A
    Chief Justice
    g2,.&q2<
    j Justices                 /
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 84-096

Citation Numbers: 210 Mont. 477, 681 P.2d 1096

Judges: Curium

Filed Date: 5/5/1984

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/10/2024