In Re the Marriage of Heather Dawne Jobes and James Anthony Jobes Upon the Petition of Heather Dawne Jobes, and Concerning James Anthony Jobes
This text of In Re the Marriage of Heather Dawne Jobes and James Anthony Jobes Upon the Petition of Heather Dawne Jobes, and Concerning James Anthony Jobes (In Re the Marriage of Heather Dawne Jobes and James Anthony Jobes Upon the Petition of Heather Dawne Jobes, and Concerning James Anthony Jobes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 16-0338 Filed March 8, 2017
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF HEATHER DAWNE JOBES AND JAMES ANTHONY JOBES
Upon the Petition of HEATHER DAWNE JOBES, Petitioner-Appellee,
And Concerning JAMES ANTHONY JOBES, Respondent-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Kathleen A.
Kilnoski, Judge.
James Jobes appeals from provisions of the decree dissolving his
marriage to Heather Jobes. AFFIRMED.
Jon J. Puk of Woodke & Gibbons, P.C., L.L.O., Omaha, Nebraska, for
appellant.
Jill K. Harker of JK Harker Law, P.C., L.L.O., Omaha, Nebraska, for
appellee.
Considered by Potterfield, P.J., and Doyle and Tabor, JJ. 2
DOYLE, Judge.
James Jobes appeals the district court’s decree dissolving his twenty-two
year marriage to Heather Jobes. James asserts the district court erred or
abused its discretion in (1) finding Heather’s earnings in the future would not
increase from her present income, (2) awarding Heather traditional alimony for
the duration of her life, and (3) ordering James to pay a portion of Heather’s trial
attorney fees. Upon our de novo review of the record, see Iowa R. App. P.
6.907, along with a careful study of the briefs and the district court’s ruling, we
approve of the reasons and conclusions reached by the district court, and we see
no reason to disturb its ruling. The district court wrote a thoughtful and
considered ruling. Its factual findings are fully supported by the record, and the
court accurately applied the governing legal and equitable principles. Because a
full opinion would not augment or clarify existing case law, and we agree with the
district court’s reasons and conclusions, we affirm the district court’s decree
without further opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d) and (e).
Heather requests an award of appellate attorney fees. Awarding appellate
attorney fees in dissolution cases rests within our discretion, and we consider the
requesting party’s needs, the other party’s ability to pay, and whether the party
was required to defend the district court’s decision on appeal. See In re Marriage
of McDermott, 827 N.W.2d 671, 687 (Iowa 2013). After carefully considering
these factors, we award Heather $2000 in appellate attorney fees. Costs are
assessed to James.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re the Marriage of Heather Dawne Jobes and James Anthony Jobes Upon the Petition of Heather Dawne Jobes, and Concerning James Anthony Jobes, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-marriage-of-heather-dawne-jobes-and-james-anthony-jobes-upon-the-iowactapp-2017.