Stadheim v. Stadheim

2007 ND 64
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedMay 1, 2007
Docket20060193
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2007 ND 64 (Stadheim v. Stadheim) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stadheim v. Stadheim, 2007 ND 64 (N.D. 2007).

Opinion

Filed 5/1/07 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2007 ND 57

Diana Hieb, Plaintiff, Appellee and Cross-Appellant

v.

Kim Hieb, Defendant, Appellant and Cross-Appellee

No. 20060240

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Karen L. McBride (argued) and David D. Schweigert (on brief), Bucklin, Klemin & McBride, P.O. Box 955, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-0955, for plaintiff, appellee and cross-appellant.

Irvin B. Nodland, Irvin B. Nodland, PC, P.O. Box 640, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-0640, for defendant, appellant, and cross-appellee.

Hieb v. Hieb

[¶1] Kim Hieb appealed and Diana Hieb cross-appealed from a divorce judgment dividing the parties’ marital property, awarding Diana Hieb spousal support, and awarding Diana Hieb attorney fees and costs incurred for taking depositions.  Kim Hieb argues the district court erred in including certain property as part of the marital estate, awarding certain property to Diana Hieb, and failing to give him credit for some marital debts.  He also argues the court erred in computing his annual income and in awarding Diana Hieb attorney fees and costs for taking depositions.  Diana Hieb argues the court erred in excluding certain property from the marital estate and that the award of spousal support is inadequate in amount and duration.  We conclude the court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous and the court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney fees and costs.  We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner

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

Related

Deacon's Development v. Lamb
2007 ND 56 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2007 ND 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stadheim-v-stadheim-nd-2007.