Boggess v. Boggess

Court of Appeals of Utah

Boggess v. Boggess

2011 UT App 84, 250 P.3d 86, 678 Utah Adv. Rep. 37, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 80, 2011 WL 916999

CourtCourt of Appeals of Utah

DecidedMarch 17, 2011

Docket20100507-CA

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2011 UT App 84 (Boggess v. Boggess) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Utah primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boggess v. Boggess, 2011 UT App 84, 250 P.3d 86, 678 Utah Adv. Rep. 37, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 80, 2011 WL 916999 (Utah Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

DECISION

PER CURIAM:

1 Michael J. Boggess (Husband) appeals the trial court's order dividing a marital debt and awarding attorney fees to Tina A. Bog-gess (Wife). We affirm.

12 The trial court's division of debts is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Connell v. Connell, 2010 UT App 139, ¶ 8, 233 P.3d 836. Similarly, an appellate *87 court will "review a trial court's decision regarding attorney fees in a divoree proceeding for an abuse of discretion." Id. 16 (internal quotation marks omitted).

13 It is undisputed that Husband agreed to sign documents that would permit the sale of the marital home and avoid foreclosure, but that he did not do so. The trial court found that his refusal was unreasonable and contributed to the foreclosure. Accordingly, because Husband's own actions permitted the foreclosure to proceed, the trial court determined that the deficiency was the responsibility of both parties Husband has shown no abuse of discretion in the division of the debt arising from the foreclosure of the marital home.

€4 "Both the decision to award attorney fees and the amount of such fees are within the trial court's sound discretion." Id. 127 (internal quotation marks omitted). In awarding fees, the trial court must consider the receiving spouse's financial need, the payor spouse's ability to pay, and the reasonableness of the requested fees. See id. The trial court found that Wife was in need, that Husband had the ability to pay, and that the fee request was reasonable. The court considered the required factors. Contrary to Husband's assertions, the fees were not attached to specific hearings but were within the court's discretion to award as part of the divorcee proceedings. See Utah Code Ann. § 80-8-3(1) (Supp.2010). Husband has shown no abuse of discretion in the award of fees.

11 5 Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DECISION

PER CURIAM:

1 Michael J. Boggess (Husband) appeals the trial court's order dividing a marital debt and awarding attorney fees to Tina A. Bog-gess (Wife). We affirm.

12 The trial court's division of debts is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Connell v. Connell, 2010 UT App 139, ¶ 8, 233 P.3d 836. Similarly, an appellate *87 court will "review a trial court's decision regarding attorney fees in a divoree proceeding for an abuse of discretion." Id. 16 (internal quotation marks omitted).

13 It is undisputed that Husband agreed to sign documents that would permit the sale of the marital home and avoid foreclosure, but that he did not do so. The trial court found that his refusal was unreasonable and contributed to the foreclosure. Accordingly, because Husband's own actions permitted the foreclosure to proceed, the trial court determined that the deficiency was the responsibility of both parties Husband has shown no abuse of discretion in the division of the debt arising from the foreclosure of the marital home.

€4 "Both the decision to award attorney fees and the amount of such fees are within the trial court's sound discretion." Id. 127 (internal quotation marks omitted). In awarding fees, the trial court must consider the receiving spouse's financial need, the payor spouse's ability to pay, and the reasonableness of the requested fees. See id. The trial court found that Wife was in need, that Husband had the ability to pay, and that the fee request was reasonable. The court considered the required factors. Contrary to Husband's assertions, the fees were not attached to specific hearings but were within the court's discretion to award as part of the divorcee proceedings. See Utah Code Ann. § 80-8-3(1) (Supp.2010). Husband has shown no abuse of discretion in the award of fees.

11 5 Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2011 UT App 84, 250 P.3d 86, 678 Utah Adv. Rep. 37, 2011 Utah App. LEXIS 80, 2011 WL 916999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boggess-v-boggess-utahctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack