Main Menu

Aubert v. Wilson

FAMILY LAW

Hannah Rogers

In Aubert v. Wilson, 483 P.3d 179 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a disproportionately high share of the marital estate to one spouse when the other spouse died after the divorce decree but before the distribution of marital property. (Id. at 191). Wilson filed for divorce from her husband, Aubert. (Id. at 183). The superior court granted Wilson’s motion to bifurcate proceedings, so that the parties became immediately divorced, and their property would be divided after trial. (Id.). After the court issued the divorce decree in Wilson’s favor, but before the property division trial, Aubert died, and his estate was substituted as a party. (Id.). The superior court found that Aubert’s death called for an unequal distribution of marital property, (Id. at 184), dividing the marital property 90% to 10% in favor of Wilson. (Id. at 183). Aubert’s estate appealed the court’s classification of several items as either premarital or marital property and the court’s disproportionate distribution of marital property. (Id. at 184). The supreme court found that the superior court committed several clear errors in its property classifications of the following items: a house and its related debt, (Id. at 186), a boat, (Id. at 188), two vehicles (Id. at 189), and credit card debt (Id. at 190). Regarding the disproportionate allocation of property to Wilson, the supreme court found that a trial court has broad latitude in dividing marital property and may consider each spouse’s future economic need in its distribution of marital property. (Id. at 191). Because the living spouse will encounter greater future economic need, it was not an abuse of discretion to award the living spouse a greater share of the marital estate. (Id. at 192). The supreme court held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a disproportionately high share of the marital estate to one spouse when the other spouse died after the divorce decree but before the distribution of marital property. (Id.).

 

 

 

Aubert v. Wilson

FAMILY LAW

Hannah Rogers

In Aubert v. Wilson, 483 P.3d 179 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a disproportionately high share of the marital estate to one spouse when the other spouse died after the divorce decree but before the distribution of marital property. (Id. at 191). Wilson filed for divorce from her husband, Aubert. (Id. at 183). The superior court granted Wilson’s motion to bifurcate proceedings, so that the parties became immediately divorced, and their property would be divided after trial. (Id.). After the court issued the divorce decree in Wilson’s favor, but before the property division trial, Aubert died, and his estate was substituted as a party. (Id.). The superior court found that Aubert’s death called for an unequal distribution of marital property, (Id. at 184), dividing the marital property 90% to 10% in favor of Wilson. (Id. at 183). Aubert’s estate appealed the court’s classification of several items as either premarital or marital property and the court’s disproportionate distribution of marital property. (Id. at 184). The supreme court found that the superior court committed several clear errors in its property classifications of the following items: a house and its related debt, (Id. at 186), a boat, (Id. at 188), two vehicles (Id. at 189), and credit card debt (Id. at 190). Regarding the disproportionate allocation of property to Wilson, the supreme court found that a trial court has broad latitude in dividing marital property and may consider each spouse’s future economic need in its distribution of marital property. (Id. at 191). Because the living spouse will encounter greater future economic need, it was not an abuse of discretion to award the living spouse a greater share of the marital estate. (Id. at 192). The supreme court held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a disproportionately high share of the marital estate to one spouse when the other spouse died after the divorce decree but before the distribution of marital property. (Id.).