Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Opinion Digests / Family Law / Court Rejects Complaint About Real Estate Sale

Court Rejects Complaint About Real Estate Sale

A husband who did not timely perfect an appeal of a final divorce decree cannot now challenge the court’s equitable distribution or appointment of a special commissioner to sell marital property, and the Court of Appeals affirms the trial court judgment and remands for an award of attorney’s fees on appeal to wife, including fees at the remand hearing.

Husband argues he was prejudiced by the sale of the Sonnyland Mulch Company real estate because the trial court approved an “under-valued” sale price of the property. He argues that he presented evidence that another purchaser was willing to buy the property for $35,000 more than the auction bidder. The trial court denied husband’s motion and allowed the auction sale to continue.

Husband does not offer any legal authority to support his arguments and this court finds husband’s failure to comply with Rule 5A:20(e) is significant.

This court holds wife is entitled to a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs and remands for the trial court to set a reasonable award of fees and costs incurred by wife in this appeal.

Wright v. Wright (Per Curiam) No. 0660-14-3, Oct. 14, 2014; Washington County Cir.Ct. (Lowe) Robert M. Galumbeck for appellant; Johnny L. Rosenbaum for appellee. VLW 014-7-305(UP), 6 pp.

VLW 014-7-305

Fulltext Opinions

Leave a Reply