Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Starrett v. Starrett

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

September 18, 2014

CHRISTINE M. STARRETT
v.
IRVEN G. STARRETT

Argued April 7, 2014.

David M. Lipman, Esq., and James T. Lawley, Esq., Lipman & Katz, P.A., Augusta, for appellant Christine M. Starrett.

Steven C. Peterson, Esq., West Rockport, for appellee Irven G. Starrett.

David M. Lipman, Esq., for appellant Christine M. Starrett.

Steven C. Peterson, Esq., for appellee Irven G. Starrett.

Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, SILVER, MEAD, GORMAN, and JABAR, JJ.

OPINION

Page 436

SAUFLEY, C.J.

[¶1] Christine M. Starrett appeals from a divorce judgment entered in the District Court (Rockland, Worth, J. ) and from an order granting in part and denying in part her post-judgment motion for additional or amended findings of fact and conclusions of law and to amend the divorce judgment. Christine's primary contention is that the court erred or abused its discretion in its valuation of the parties' privately owned business, Irv's Drywall. Christine also challenges the court's estimate of each party's income and its decision related to the sale of the parties' marital real estate. We affirm the judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

[¶2] The following facts are drawn from the trial court's findings and from the record. Irven and Christine were married on December 6, 1980. They are both in their fifties. They have two children who are now adults and are not the subject of any dispute. The court found that the parties are " intelligent, hard-working individuals with many skills [who] have contributed equally to the acquisition of assets and debts." After nearly thirty years of marriage, they separated in May 2010, and Christine filed a complaint for divorce in June 2010.

[¶3] The parties had a difficult separation. Christine obtained a protection from abuse order against Irven, and she was served with a protection from harassment

Page 437

notice or order. Nonetheless, the parties, with the assistance of counsel, made efforts in advance of trial to resolve many of their disputes. Before the trial in November 2012, they agreed to sell some of their personal and real property, both marital and nonmarital, and to divide the proceeds. Additionally, from the time of their separation in May 2010 until March 2012, Irven ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.