Content
Delivery times may vary, especially during peak periods. I Agree to theTerms of ServiceandPrivacy Policy.
Wife further argues that the district court erred in failing to order husband to reimburse her for personal expenditures he made from the rental account funds during the pendency of the dissolution. If a party in a dissolution dissipates marital assets, “that party shall be accountable for that dissipation unless the assets are justifiably consumed to meet necessary living expenses of the parties.” Volesky v. Volesky, 412 N.W.2d 750, 752 (Minn. App. 1987); Minn. § 518.58, subd. Here, the court impliedly found husband’s testimony credible concerning payments he made from the account. Husband testified that the payments were for debts that were primarily marital in nature and benefited both parties, such as paying joint federal taxes and homestead property taxes, and purchasing a lawnmower for wife. Moreover, the district court specifically found that wife’s assertions were not credible in light of the errors in her exhibits (double-counting distributions from the account), and denied wife’s motion to amend the decree. See Sefkow v. Sefkow, 427 N.W.2d 203, 210 (Minn. 1988) (explaining that reviewing courts generally affirm a trial court’s credibility determinations, since the trial court is in the best position to assess the witness).
Recent News About Eric Lundeen
Contact the seller- opens in a new window or tab and request a shipping method to your location. Estimated delivery dates – opens in a new window or tab include seller’s handling time, origin ZIP Code, destination ZIP Code and time of acceptance and will depend on shipping service selected and receipt of cleared payment – opens in a new window or tab.
- Just click here to get started.
- §518.58, subd.
- Contractors in Wyoming are not required by the state to carry general liability or workers compensation insurance.Local regulation may differ, it is always a good idea to only hire contractors with proof of active insurance.
- Husband argues that because the court found that wife included $832 per month in transportation expenses in her monthly budget which are presently paid for by the family business, wife actually has a monthly surplus of $617.
2 , lists factors for the court to consider in determining the amount and duration of maintenance, the issue is, in essence, a balancing of the recipient’s need against the obligor’s ability to pay. Erlandson, 318 N.W.2d at 39-40. On appeal from an award of maintenance, appellate courts determine only whether the district court abused its broad discretion. Erlandson v. Erlandson, 318 N.W.2d 36, 38 (Minn. 1982). This court will not find an abuse of discretion absent “a clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record.” Rutten v. Rutten, 347 N.W.2d 47, 50 (Minn. 1984). At the hearing on the parties’ motions for amended findings, husband agreed to stipulate to an order that an accounting should be made of the rental income account and conceded that wife is a co-owner and entitled to half the net income. With respect to the budgetary reductions made by the court, wife contests the reduction in clothing allowance to $120 per month.
Eric R Lundeen
Life insurance on the obligor’s life is justified when it would afford the receiving spouse “a measure of security for loss of maintenance in the event her husband should predecease her.” O’Brien v. O’Brien, 343 N.W.2d 850, 853 (Minn. 1984). There is no requirement that an award of maintenance be secured by life insurance. § 518.552, subd. It appears that the facts found by the district court present the situation envisioned by the legislature for permanent maintenance. The parties had a long-term marriage, with one spouse out of the workforce for a considerable period of time. In addition, the court found it was unlikely wife was able to earn the income necessary to support the standard of living established during the marriage. Moreover, although the court found that wife would have the means to become self-sufficient when AVVR is sold, it provided no detailed evidence in support of that finding.
TypeArchitectDate Issued BuildZoom verified this license was active as of June 2020. Do you work for this business?
Homeowners whohire through BuildZoom’s free bidding system report high rates of satisfaction, and homeowners who research contractors online are twice as likely to be happy at the end of their project. The best way to use BuildZoom is to let us recommend contractors for your remodeling projects. BuildZoom combines license information on 3.5 million contractors with 175 million building permits, and over 135,000 reviews from property owners. BuildZoom is a database of every licensed contractor in the United States.
However, as husband points out, the cost and feasibility of obtaining such insurance was never briefed or argued. Generally, this court will not consider matters not argued and considered in the court below. Thiele v Stich, 425 N.W.2d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988). Moreover, because wife’s need for ongoing maintenance after the sale of AVVR is speculative, the district court did not err in failing to require husband to obtain an insurance policy to secure his maintenance obligation. Wife next argues that the district court erred in not awarding permanent maintenance.
The district court awarded wife temporary maintenance while retaining jurisdiction. This court reviews a district court’s maintenance award under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Erlandson, 318 N.W.2d at 38. “There must be a clearly erroneous conclusion that is against logic and the facts on record before this court will find that the trial court abused its discretion.” Rutten, 347 N.W.2d at 50 . The difference between wife’s reasonable monthly expenses and her maintenance award creates a monthly deficit of $215 per month. Husband argues that because the court found that wife included $832 per month in transportation expenses in her monthly budget which are presently paid for by the family business, wife actually has a monthly surplus of $617. However, the court’s findings are unclear as to whether the transportation expenses were subtracted to arrive at the $4,715 figure.
She also testified that she went out to eat less than one night a week, and that she was a “careful” spender and that when she did go out to eat, it was to moderately priced restaurants. Consequently, the court found that $200 in “spending money” and $300 for “entertainment expenses” was excessive and reduced those amounts, although the order does not specify what reduction was made. that the party to whom fees, costs, and disbursements are awarded does not have the means to pay them. Husband’s salary increase arguably decreases the value of the asset to be sold. In the interests of judicial efficiency, we remand to the district court for a determination of whether or not husband’s salary increase constitutes a breach of his fiduciary duty.
The records were matched using first and last name only. The records below may not pertain to the individual that you’re looking for, and may or may not pertain to the same charge. Please make your own determination of the relevance of these court records.
Geske v. Marcolina, 624 N.W.2d 813, 817 (Minn. App. 2001). Wife argues that the district court failed to protect her lien interest in AVVR pending its sale. Wife’s argument arises from husband’s postdecree salary increase of over $43,000 annually. Wife next argues that the court erred in failing to require husband to reimburse her for taxes she paid on the parties’ rental income because husband expended funds from the rental income account during the dissolution for his own personal expenses. In denying wife’s motion, the court found that the vast majority of the rental income was used to pay off mortgages on their marital property, thereby benefiting both parties. Under the facts presented here, the valuation date of the building is functionally the date of the sale, which has yet to occur.
BuildZoom does the homework for you and helps you hire the right contractor. TypeArchitectBuildZoom verified this license was active as of November 2020. Their license was verified as active when we last checked. If you are thinking of hiring Eric R. Lundeen, we recommend double-checking their license status with the license board and using our bidding system to get competitive quotes. Eric R. Lundeen, Jackson, WY holds a Architect license and 1 other license according to the Wyoming license board. 100% are in their 50s, while the average age is 50.
Eric Lundeen
$0.00 shipping for each additional eligible item you buy from historicimages-store, when you use the cart to make your purchase. This item will ship to Netherlands, but the seller has not specified shipping options.
Just click here to get started. We recommend getting multiple quotes for any construction project. Our free bidding system will get you quotes from Eric R. Lundeen and 2 other top contractors. Use our remodeling calculator to get a ballpark estimate for your project. If you’re ready to hire, use our bidding system to get actual quotes from local contractors.
We work hard to figure out who the great contractors are, and who the bad contractors are. Before hiring a contractor in Wyoming, be sure to get at least 3 detailed bids. Quality contractors will take the time to explain their budget proposal,and help guide you through the estimate process. Be wary of an abnormally low bid, they are not worth the risk. These underpriced projects often do not end well for the homeowner, choose a contractor you trust and can clearly communicate with. BuildZoom has made the bid collection process extremely simple .
Eric Lundeen License Info
The record reveals that the parties’ attorneys agreed, contrary to the court’s order (and without seeking the court’s permission), to extend the time for exchange of trial exhibits. Indeed, the court assessed each party $1,000 costs for failure to comply with the amended order for trial. Appellant argues that the district court abused discretion in denying her both need-based and conduct-based attorney fees. An award of need-based attorney fees under Minn. § 518.14, subd. 1 , “rests almost entirely within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” Crosby v. Crosby, 587 N.W.2d 292, 298 (Minn. App. 1998) , review denied (Minn. Feb. 18, 1999). In a footnote in Geske v. Marcolina, 624 N.W.2d 813, 817 n.1 (Minn. App. 2001), this court acknowledges that there is a question of whether Minn.
Eric has a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Design, has a Master’s Degree in Architecture, is a member of the American Institute of Architects and NCARB, as well as a Licensed Architect. If you are looking for remodeling ideas, you can browse hundreds of beautiful photos of work performed by our general contractors. Will usually ship within 1 business day of receiving cleared payment.
If you hire a contractor through BuildZoom, that contractor is accountable to us. We can enforce standards of behavior, mediate disputes, and guarantee satisfaction.
Statistics For All 31 Eric Lundeen Results:
Unlock this free profileto update company info and see who’s viewing your profile. If you are thinking of hiring Eric Lundeen, we recommend double-checking their license status with the license board and using our bidding system to get competitive quotes. Their BuildZoom score of 90 indicates that they are licensed or registered but we do not have additional information about them. Eric Lundeen, Wilson, WY holds a Architect license according to the Idaho license board. Spokeo is not a consumer reporting agency as defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act . Do not use this site to make decisions about employment, tenant screening, or any purpose covered by the FCRA.
The court’s findings of wife’s reasonable monthly expenses are also supported by evidentiary exhibits that include husband’s analysis of wife’s monthly expenses substantiated by her own bank and credit card statements. Including expenses currently paid for by husband and AVVR, wife’s average monthly expenses from were $4,006.
Given the standard of living the parties enjoyed during their marriage, the court awarded wife $4,500 per month in temporary maintenance, finding that wife would be self-supporting after the sale of the business. The record reveals that the parties had a traditional marriage. Wife stayed home to care for the children while husband was the wage-earner, employed as CEO of their closely-held corporation, AVVR, Inc. During the last years of their marriage, the corporation paid wife $43,200 per year in salary, although she performed no duties for the corporation. Husband, as president, earned a gross annual income of approximately $187,000. The couple also earned gross annual income of $64,800 from a rental property. The court determined husband’s current net monthly income to be approximately $12,000 and his reasonable monthly expenses to be $5,180.
Thus, on the record before us, we cannot conclude that the court abused discretion in finding wife’s reasonable monthly expenses to be $4,715. The district court specifically identified the conduct of the parties that contributed to the length and expense of the proceedings.
We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. Thus, it is uncertain that wife will have the means to become self-sufficient. Further, until husband retires, it is likely he will have ample resources to provide wife with spousal maintenance. Should husband’s resources change upon retirement, or should wife’s investment prove adequate, he can subsequently move for modification under Minn. Accordingly, we conclude that the court’s findings support an award of permanent maintenance and that the district court erred in awarding temporary maintenance.
