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.

Katchmar v. Katchmar

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Fairfield

May 8, 2017

LINDA A. KATCHMAR Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
KEVIN C. KATCHMAR Defendant-Appellant

         Appeal from the Fairfield County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division Case No. 14 DR 440

          For Plaintiff-Appellee: CHARLES M. ELSEA, SANDRA W. DAVIS.

          For Defendant-Appellant: GARY J. GOTTFRIED, ERIC M. BROWN.

          Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, P.J., Hon. John W. Wise, J., Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., J.

          OPINION

          DELANEY, P.J.

         {¶1} Defendant-Appellant Kevin C. Katchmar appeals the September 14, 2016 judgment entry of the Fairfield County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         {¶2} Defendant-Appellant Kevin C. Katchmar and Plaintiff-Appellee Linda A. Katchmar were married on February 27, 1987. Two children were born as issue of the marriage, but are now emancipated. Wife filed a complaint for divorce on October 31, 2014. Husband counterclaimed for divorce on December 2, 2014.

         {¶3} Husband and Wife entered into an agreement on July 29, 2016 to divide the majority of their assets and debts. The remaining issues before the trial court were the division of a College Advantage account and spousal support. The only issue on appeal is the award of spousal support. The trial court held a bench trial and the following evidence in relation to spousal support was adduced at trial.

         {¶4} Husband was born in 1956 and at the time of the trial, Husband was 59 years old. Husband graduated from college in 1978 with a degree in criminology. Husband's early career was to provide retail store security. In 1985, Husband began working for the Limited Brand Stores in retail security. His highest position with Limited with the Director of Loss Prevention. The Loss Prevention unit was sold to New York & Company. Husband remained with the division and became the Vice President of Loss Prevention for New York & Company.

         {¶5} While working for New York & Company, Husband traveled around the country to 500 stores to manage store security issues. Part of his job responsibilities included hiring and firing people. He also provided security for the CEO of New York & Company.

         {¶6} Pursuant to Husband's Social Security Statement admitted into evidence as Wife's Exhibit 8, Husband has earned over $50, 000 in income since 1990. From 1997 to 2013, Husband earned over $100, 000 in Medicare earnings. From 2010 to 2013, Husband earned over $200, 000 in Medicare earnings.

         {¶7} Wife was born in 1960. She graduated from college in 1982 with a degree in retail and she began working in retail in 1983. From 1989 to 1990, Wife worked as a financial planner/internal buyer for Victoria's Secret earning an annual salary of $35, 000. When Husband was transferred to the East Coast in 1990, Wife and Husband agreed Wife would not work outside of the home. Husband provided financially for Wife and children, and the family lived a comfortable lifestyle. In 2009, Wife was hired as an office assistant at a school. She was paid less than $10, 000 per year for that position. Wife later moved to the school secretary position. In 2015, Wife's income was $30, 530.71. At the time of the trial, Wife was given a new contract by the school board to become a twelvemonth employee. Wife's annual salary would increase to $39, 104.

         {¶8} On July 13, 2015, New York & Company terminated Husband's employment. Husband and New York & Company entered into a separation agreement where New York & Company would pay Husband $4, 250.00 per week until July 22, 2016. As part of Husband's employment benefits, New York & Company had leased a car for Husband. New York & Company bought out the lease when Husband was terminated and Husband was permitted to keep the car.

         {¶9} Husband testified that as of July 22, 2016, he has received no income from any other source of employment.

         {¶10} In 2014 or 2015, Husband enrolled in Heritage College to complete a program in massage therapy. Husband borrowed approximately $14, 000 from a friend to pay for the program. At the time of the trial, Husband had taken the state licensing exam to become a licensed massage therapy. It was Husband's intent to be self-employed as a massage therapist and operate a wellness clinic. Wife testified the first time she became ...


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.