Summary 2009 WY 141

Summary of Decision issued November 17, 2009

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Asherman v. Asherman

Citation: 2009 WY 141

Docket Number: S-09-0050

Appeal from the District Court of Park County, the Honorable Steven R. Cranfill, Judge.

Representing Appellant Richard Asherman: Michael A. LaBazzo of Law Offices of Michael A. LaBazzo, LLC, Cody, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Robin Asherman: Jill Deann LaRance of LaRance & Syth, PC, Billings, Montana.

Facts/Discussion: In 2007, the district court entered a divorce decree, incorporating the parties’ Child Custody and Property Settlement Agreement. Later, Wife filed a motion asking the court to have funds from the sale of a property disbursed in accordance with the agreement. Specifically, she stated that three debts, including the remaining balance on a $155,000 debt on her residence, were to be paid from the proceeds of the sale, after which any remaining funds were to be split equally between the parties.
Several provisions of the settlement agreement address payment of the debt resulting from the purchase of the Alpine Avenue property. The provisions clearly established that the debt was to be paid out of the proceeds from the sale of the Logan Mountain property before the remainder was split equally between the parties. Husband argued that the settlement agreement was ambiguous concerning how the Alpine Avenue debt was to be paid and that the overall intent was to divide the parties’ assets according to their origin and the relative contributions of the parties. The Court has recognized that when the parties execute a detailed property agreement, it will enforce the plain language of the agreement even if argument can be made that a particular provision was not necessarily consistent with one of the parties’ interests. The Court concluded as it did in Brockway and Wunsch that the plain language of the agreement controlled. The settlement agreement was very detailed, addressing the parties’ assets and liabilities separately and with obvious care.
Husband also argued that there was an agreement to have Wife immediately reimburse Husband for all payments that he paid on the debt including principal and interest which meant that he could have paid off the loan prior to the closing of the Logan Mountain property sale and then required Wife to pay the entire amount out of her share. The Court agreed but noted it was simply a second procedure set out in the agreement. Although the two provisions might seem inconsistent, it did not render the agreement ambiguous. The provisions were not mutually exclusive. Wife reimbursed Husband out of her share of the sale proceeds for payments he had made on the Alpine Avenue debt prior to the Logan Mountain property sale.

Conclusion: The settlement agreement clearly stated that the outstanding balance on the $155,000 debt resulting from the purchase of Wife’s Alpine Avenue property would be paid out of the joint proceeds of the sale of the Logan Mountain property.

Affirmed.

J. Kite delivered the decision.

Link: Please visit the Judiciary website to see the full context of the opinion.

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]