Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Roush v. Roush

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District

March 9, 2017

Allison C. Roush, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
William F. Roush, Defendant-Appellant.

         APPEALS from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Division of Domestic Relations C.P.C. No. 13DR-1497

          McKinlay Law Offices, LLC, Amy M. McKinlay, and Kerry Hageman-Froelich, for appellee.

          Amy M. McKinlay.

          The Tyack Law Firm Co., LPA, and Thomas M. Tyack, for appellee.

          Thomas M. Tyack.

          DECISION

          DORRIAN, J.

         {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, William F. Roush, appeals from judgments of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Division of Domestic Relations, denying his motion for new trial, finding him in contempt of court, and awarding attorney fees to plaintiff-appellee, Allison C. Roush, related to the contempt proceedings. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

         I. Facts and Procedural History

         {¶ 2} The parties were married in 1996 and had two children. In March 2013, appellee asked appellant for a dissolution of the marriage. Shortly thereafter, appellee transferred one-half of the balance in the parties' joint checking account to her personal account; appellant subsequently transferred the remaining balance of the joint account to his personal account. In April 2013, appellee was involuntarily detained under the custody of the Franklin County ADAMH Board at Netcare for two days, pursuant to an order of detention issued by the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division, based on assertions that appellee suffered from depression and had expressed suicidal thoughts. On April 23, 2013, appellee filed a complaint for divorce.

         {¶ 3} The trial court entered a judgment granting the divorce on May 21, 2015. The divorce decree ordered appellee to submit a shared parenting plan incorporating the joint shared parenting plan previously filed with the court. The decree also provided for child support and spousal support to be paid by appellant. The decree identified the parties' separate property and provided for division of the marital property. Among the provisions governing the division of property, the decree ordered appellant to transfer one-half of the balance of his Chase Roth individual retirement account and $374, 404 from his Chase retirement savings plan to appellee. The decree provided that a qualified domestic relations order was to be prepared to facilitate the transfer of the retirement savings account funds. The decree also ordered appellant to pay appellee $15, 000 toward her attorney fees.

         {¶ 4} Appellant filed a motion for new trial on June 15, 2015, arguing that the judgment issuing the divorce decree was against the weight of the evidence and contrary to law. Appellee filed a motion for contempt on July 29, 2015, alleging that appellant failed to comply with specific provisions of the divorce decree. On September 1, 2015, the trial court issued a nunc pro tunc amended divorce decree, which corrected a provision relating to appellant's child support obligation if health insurance was not provided. The trial court issued a judgment entry denying appellant's motion for new trial on October 28, 2015. Appellant then filed a notice of appeal to this court of the judgment entry denying the motion for new trial on November 24, 2015, which was assigned case No. 15AP-1071. On December 7, 2015, appellant filed a motion to stay the judgment entry granting the divorce decree. The trial court denied the motion to stay on February 18, 2016, immediately prior to a hearing on the motion for contempt. Following that hearing, on March 9, 2016, the trial court issued a judgment finding appellant in contempt for failing to comply with various provisions of the divorce decree. On April 7, 2016, appellant filed a notice of appeal, assigned case No. 16AP-264, of the judgment entry granting appellee's motion for contempt. Subsequently, on April 22, 2016, the trial court issued a judgment ordering appellant to pay an additional $5, 000 to appellee toward her attorney fees related to the contempt proceeding. On May 19, 2016, appellant filed a notice of appeal, assigned case No. 16AP-388, of the trial court's judgment granting appellee's motion for attorney fees from the contempt proceeding.

         II. Assignments of Error

         {¶ 5} Appellant appeals from the trial court judgment denying his motion for new trial, assigning seven errors in case No. 15AP-1071 for this court's review:

I. The Trial Court erred in overruling the Motion for New Trial and failing to discuss or review the issues raised on the Motion for New Trial.
II. In the Motion for New Trial, with the appropriate citation, were the following:
a. Issues surrounding an allegation that the Defendant caused the Plaintiff to be hospitalized for mental health reasons when the reality was the Probate Court issued an Order causing the Plaintiff to be taken to a mental health facility for evaluation.
b. The parties had agreed that equal division of certain extraordinary expenses for the children, which was journalized and filed, the Trial Court entered an interim decision ordering the Defendant to pay 2/3 and the Plaintiff 1/3. While this issue may have been moot because the Court subsequently filed a "nunc pro tunc Judgment Entry Decree of Divorce where that issue appears to have been adjusted."
III.The Trial Court erred in incorrectly doubling child support where there was no insurance contrary to the statutes.
IV. The Trial Court erred in refusing to recognize that two joint accounts in the name of Plaintiff and one of her children were part of the marital assets, not education accounts for the children. Other accounts which were recognized as joint educational accounts were described.
V. The Trial Court erred when it found that the Plaintiff had paid and used non-marital assets to contribute toward the initial purchase of the real estate owned by the parties has [sic] a non-martial [sic] interest when the only documentation was a check on the account from the bank where the parties had their account. No evidence was presented to demonstrate that check came from funds that weren't in existence prior to the parties' marriage other than the Plaintiff simply saying it was.
VI. The Trial Court erred in finding that money that was paid to the Plaintiff suggesting that the Defendant received only a very limited compensation for damage to the parties [sic] real estate when in reality another check for several thousand dollars showing the date of loss and the amount deposited came from the summer the wind damage that happened the previous summer, said funds having been placed in the joint account from which the Plaintiff then removed forty-eight thousand dollars.
VII. The Trial Court erred in findings with regard to attorney fees then proceeding then to assess an additional $15, 000.00 in attorney fees against the Defendant in favor of the Plaintiff.

         {¶ 6} Appellant also appeals in case Nos. 16AP-264 and 16AP-388 from the trial court judgments finding him in contempt of court and awarding appellee attorney fees related to the contempt proceeding, assigning four errors for this court's review, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.