Equitable Distribution Dispute Reviewed by Pennsylvania Superior Court

Distribution of property is usually among the most controversial topics in divorce. Equitable distribution is the law of the land in Pennsylvania. Properties are distributed in accordance with what is fair, which does not necessarily mean equally. In this article, we’ll discuss a case involving an appeal on whether the trial court made an error dividing the couple’s property. 

Background of the case

The facts underlying this case originated from the process of divorce between a married couple who had jointly acquired a number of properties during their marriage. Just like many divorcing couples, there was a disagreement on how the properties should be divided.

The court was tasked with the responsibility of determining whether certain properties were part of the marital estate or if they belonged to one spouse. Under Pennsylvania law, the court is required to consider numerous statutory considerations before making a decision regarding the division of marital property. These include the duration of the marriage, financial and earnings capabilities of each of the spouses, and more.

Based on a review of the facts, the court came up with an equitable distribution of the marital properties, considering several statutory factors. This distribution, however, favored the former husband. The wife appealed the trial court’s decision. 

The appeal

The wife filed an appeal against the equitable distribution ruling to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. The wife maintained that the trial court distributed the couple’s assets unfairly in violation of the statute.

Specifically, the appellant maintained that there was an abuse of discretion during the distribution of marital property since the trial court either misused the statutory factors or failed to consider some evidence regarding the value and ownership of marital property.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania pointed out that trial courts enjoy considerable discretion when dividing the marital estate. The reason for this is that the division of marital property is meant to secure equity between the spouses rather than mathematical equality.

When analyzing an appeal, an appellate court usually checks whether the trial judge has accounted for the statutory factors involving property division. As a result of their analysis of the case in question, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania came to the conclusion that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and appropriately considered the statutory factors relevant to the case. The appeal, therefore, was denied.

Key takeaways

The big takeaway from this case is that the courts don’t have to divide property equally between the two parties in a divorce. Instead, they can favor one or the other party based on Pennsylvania law and the evidence presented during the trial. There are numerous reasons for deviating from the 50/50 standard. The court must lean on these reasons to equitably divide the marital estate.

Talk to a Philadelphia, PA, Divorce Lawyer Today 

The Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane represent the interests of those pursuing a divorce in Philadelphia. Call our Philadelphia family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin preparing your case right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/superior-court/2009/a24031-08.html