In re the Marriage of Hansen
Max F. Hansen, Petitioner-Appellant/Cross-Appellee
Karin L. Hansen, Respondent-Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Attorney for Appellant
Richard D. Davidson
Attorney for Appellee
M. Leanne Tyler
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Mark R. Lawson, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Heard by Danilson, C.J., and Mullins and McDonald, JJ. Opinion by Danilson, C.J. Special concurrence by McDonald, J. Concurrence in part and dissent in part by Mullins, J. (50 pages)
Max Hansen appeals, and Karin Hansen cross-appeals from the district court’s decree dissolving their marriage. Max asserts the district court’s award of spousal support is inappropriate in this case. Max also challenges the court’s order he pay a portion of Karin’s trial-attorney fees. Karin contends the district court should have ordered a greater spousal-support award. Karin also argues the district court improperly determined the parties’ most recent postnuptial agreement controlled the division of assets, and erred in not awarding her a share of the equity in Max’s Davenport residence. Karin requests attorney fees on appeal. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude there is no reason to disturb the district court’s property distribution, and the district court properly awarded Karin trial-attorney fees. However, we also conclude the district court’s spousal support award was inequitable and modify the spousal-support award. We deny Karin’s request for appellate-attorney fees. SPECIAL CONCURRENCE ASSERTS: I concur in the property division as equitable and concur in the spousal support award because Max conceded he was willing to pay spousal support at oral argument. PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: I dissent from the modification of the permanent alimony to Karin as inequitable in light of the award to Max of 100% of the roughly $9.6 million, 250% increase in the value of his premarital property and netting him $15.7 million after this eight-year marriage.
