.webp)
.png)
In many ways, the property division process in Maryland can be likened to puzzle solving: as in solving a puzzle, Maryland courts have to make certain determinations, and these determinations are based on the continual resolution of recurring problems. Perhaps the most fundamental problem involved in the property division phase of divorce is the correct classification of all property as either marital or non-marital. As we have discussed on our blog, Maryland follows certain established principles, common in other jurisdictions, when it comes to classifying property. One principle is the rebuttable presumption that property acquired during marriage is marital property; this is just one of many other principles, many of which we have examined before.
The case of Brown v. Brown (2010) is another somewhat older case which provides useful lessons for present litigants. In this complex divorce case, the appellant managed to successfully overturn a property order by undermining the court’s initial classifications. Let’s take a closer look at this case.
Facts of the Case
The couple in this case was married in 1999, and consisted of a lawyer and a medical doctor (cardiologist). Although the lawyer had a license to practice law, that license was out of state, and so the lawyer (husband) never earned substantial income during the marriage. The only consistent income earned by the husband during the marriage was as a medical billing assistant working directly for the wife’s company.
When the divorce was initiated, the parties presented copious evidence regarding the characterization of all property, both marital and non-marital. Although the court had ample evidence to work with, making certain determinations in this case was difficult, in part because the parties owned assets which had fluctuating valuations. Ultimately, the trial court awarded the parties’ marital residence to the wife, essentially transferring the husband’s half of the property; also, the court awarded the wife a sizable lump sum as alimony, $215,000, and this sum was based on reasonable approximations of the total marital property value. The husband then appealed these determinations.
Ruling & Analysis
Upon review, the appellate division concluded that the transfer of the husband’s ownership interest in the marital house had been based on an incorrect classification of the property itself. The parties had shown evidence that the marital house had been titled in a particular arrangement, with the husband and wife as equal share owners in a “tenants by the entirety” configuration. But, the parties had also specified in a separate private agreement that the property was to be held as non-marital property. The presumption that property acquired during marriage is marital property may be overcome or rebutted by private agreement, as was the case here. Because the agreement was found to be valid, then the appellate division had to overrule the trial court’s transfer of the marital house. And, because this award had been erroneously granted, the appellate division overturned the lump sum alimony award, with instructions that the court use a new marital property value to reassess a proper award.
We can see how knowledge of property classification principles can aid a party navigating through the property division process here in Maryland. In some instances, having an expert can be useful for potentially avoiding additional litigation at the appellate level.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Information
To learn more about the classification of property as either marital or non-marital, the role of the court in property division, property division generally, or any other pertinent family law matter, contact one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-1187.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
