[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Appeal from the District Court for Dakota County: PAUL J. VAUGHAN, Judge.
Craig H. Lane, P.C., for appellant.
Michele M. Lewon, of Kollars & Lewon, P.L.C., for appellee.
MOORE, Chief Judge, and IRWIN and PIRTLE, Judges.
[22 Neb.App. 668] Irwin, Judge.
Terry Lee Logan appeals an order of the district court for Dakota County, Nebraska, in which order the court dissolved Terry's marriage to Lori Jean Logan, divided marital assets, and ordered each party to pay his or her respective attorney fees. On appeal, Terry challenges the court's valuation of the marital home and a family business, the court's division of other property and debt, and the court's allowance of temporary alimony to the date of the decree. We find no merit to the appeal, and we affirm.
The parties were married in 1973. During the course of their marriage, they had three children, all of whom are now adults.
At the time of trial, Terry was 61 years of age and Lori was 57 years of age.
In August 2012, Lori filed a complaint seeking dissolution of the parties' marriage. In her complaint, Lori requested an award of temporary and permanent spousal support, an equitable division of marital assets and debts, and attorney fees. In October 2013, the district court entered a decree dissolving the parties' marriage and dividing the parties' assets and debts. Terry has appealed from the decree, and Lori has purported to bring a cross-appeal.
The primary issues raised by Terry in his appeal concern the valuation of the parties' marital home, the valuation of a [22 Neb.App. 669] business operated by Terry, the division of other property and debt, and an award of temporary alimony during the proceedings below.
1. Marital Residence
Terry and Lori purchased the marital residence in 1998. Lori moved out of the residence in August 2012, and Terry was still residing there at the time of trial. Both parties testified that they wanted to be awarded the marital residence.
Terry testified that he believed that the marital residence was worth $185,000. Lori testified that she believed that the marital residence was worth $198,000. In addition, a real estate broker opined that the marital residence was worth between $193,000 and $203,000.
The primary issue on appeal concerning the valuation of the marital residence relates to indebtedness of two of the parties' sons and how that indebtedness relates to the marital residence. The evidence adduced at trial indicated that the remaining amount of the primary mortgage on the marital residence was approximately $3,353.
In Lori's motion for temporary allowances, she alleged that both sons had loans secured with the parties' home as collateral. Similarly, in his affidavit objecting to temporary allowances, Terry averred that the marital residence was " subject to second mortgages representing additional collateral for two (2) of the parties' sons who could not otherwise purchase homes." In that affidavit, Terry further opined that " to his recollection, one (1) mortgage was $75,000 and the other mortgage was $80,000."
At trial, Lori provided exhibits reflecting the two sons' indebtedness to a credit union. She testified that the parties had allowed the two sons to use the marital residence as collateral for loans. At trial, Lori did not want the valuation of the marital residence reduced by the value of the sons' loans, although she agreed that the loans created liens on the residence.
At trial, Terry presented a proposed distribution of assets and liabilities, in which he proposed that the court reduce the value of the marital residence by the primary mortgage [22 Neb.App. 670] amount and also by the amount of each of the two sons' loans for which the residence was serving as collateral.
In the decree, the district court valued the marital residence at $185,000, which was Terry's proposed value, and awarded the residence to Lori, subject to indebtedness. The court reduced the value of the residence by the amount of the primary mortgage and also by the amount of each of the two sons' loans. The court specifically noted in the decree that both Terry and Lori " argued at trial that these are legitimate deductions to the equity value of the home notwithstanding the fact that the sons have, and likely will, continue to pay their respective mortgages. Since both parties have argued this position, the Court has adopted their positions."
2. Terry's Business
Terry was employed at a meatpacking company for 22 years, and then at a computer company for 15 years. He operated an individual tax preparation service on a part-time basis while employed at the computer company. When he lost his job at the computer company in 2008, he began operating his tax service on a full-time basis. Terry testified that his tax service primarily involves completion of individual tax returns, earning him approximately $50 per return.
The tax service had been operated as a limited liability company prior to the parties' separation. After the parties' separation, Terry dissolved the limited liability company. Terry testified that he dissolved the limited liability company because Lori had sought and received a protection order which made it impossible for him to continue operating the business in a business relationship with Lori. Terry ...