Linscott v. Hughbanks

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “[t]he parties’ manifestation of intent to lead separate lives, such as by filing a complaint for divorce or maintaining separate homes, can be of crucial significance when apportioning the marital estate”
• stating that “whether a particular asset qualifies as marital or separate property” is a “finding[] of fact . . . .”
• stating that “[t]he determination of the proper time for valuation of an asset is in the trial court’s discretion”
• recognizing, in the context of a divorce, that one spouse cannot dissipate funds from a joint account without explanation
• explaining that the trial court’s failure to adequately explain the reasons for its decision precluded meaningful appellate review because this Court was unable to discern the basis for the trial court’s decision
• explaining that this Court could not discern the basis for the trial court’s decision, which precluded meaningful appellate review, because the trial court had failed to adequately provide analysis or reasoning supporting its decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).