Holland v. Holland

Paragraph 7 b of the parties' post-nuptial agreement stated that the appellant was required to reimburse his ex-wife for her separate $98K investment in their lake house solely ' "from his 50 share of the net profits," ' not from any separate assets, which he may have.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

We granted John Holland’s application for discretionary appeal to review the trial court’s post-divorce order setting forth how the profits from the sale of the parties’ lake house should be calculated and distributed. We now affirm in part and reverse in part. The parties were married in 2003, and the lake house was purchased in July 2004 for $350,000. The lake house was titled solely in Mary Holland’s name, and there was no outstanding loan against the house at the time of purchase. Mary took out a revolving line of credit for $150,000 in August 2004, with a maturity date of July 2007, using the lake house as collateral. Mary withdrew the entire $150,000 and used it as a down payment on the parties’ former marital residence. In August 2005, under the same loan and account numbers, Mary extended the line of credit to $250,000, again using the lake house as security. She withdrew the additional $100,000 at that time and deposited it into an account for the parties’ jointly owned business. The line of credit now had a maturity date of July 15, 2008.

In January 2006, the parties’ entered into a post-nuptial agreement, and in May 2008, the parties were divorced, with the final decree incorporating the post-nuptial agreement. On July 21, 2008, Mary renewed the $250,000 line of credit with the same bank, under the same account and loan numbers. At that time, the account balance was $220,564. Mary made no further withdrawals on her line of credit after the $100,000 withdrawal in August 2005.

Holland v. Holland

Paragraph 7 b of the parties' post-nuptial agreement stated that the appellant was required to reimburse his ex-wife for her separate $98K investment in their lake house solely ' "from his 50 share of the net profits," ' not from any separate assets, which he may have.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report