Boolchand v. Boolchand

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 6951

Syllabus

DOMESTIC RELATIONS — DIVORCE — SEPARATE PROPERTY — EVIDENCE — ATTORNEY FEES: In a divorce action, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it held that the coverture fraction method was not appropriate to divide the separate and marital portions of a defined contribution retirement plan, even though the participant spouse had begun employment before the marriage, because the value of the defined contribution retirement benefit was based on contributions left in the defined contribution account and market forces, not years of employment or another formula. The trial court's determination that funds inherited during the marriage by one spouse remained that spouse's separate property, even though the funds were commingled with marital property, was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, where the spouse successfully traced the inherited funds with specific documentary evidence and oral testimony. The trial court's refusal to award attorney fees was not an abuse of discretion, where both parties had an equal ability to pay fees and neither party had taken frivolous positions.