In Virginia family courts, the division of marital assets in divorce cases follows the principle of “equitable distribution.” This means that judges strive to divide the assets fairly, but not necessarily equally. The court carefully considers each party’s monetary and non-monetary contributions to the acquisition of property, the child custody arrangement, and each spouse’s earning potential.
For instance, if the husband is a stay-at-home dad and the wife is the primary wage-earner, the court will consider the husband’s contributions to the home when dividing the property, even if the wife brought in most of the income. However, while fairness is the goal, our Fairfax divorce attorneys know that the division of assets may not always result in equality.
Case Example: In re: Marriage of Rintoul
A good example of this principle was seen in the recent case of In re: Marriage of Rintoul, reviewed by the Montana Supreme Court. Although this case was decided out-of-state, Montana also follows the equitable distribution model.
Case Background
The couple in this case were married for nearly four decades before filing for divorce in 2012. During their marriage, they owned and operated a vehicle repair shop, with the husband working as a mechanic and the wife as a bookkeeper. They earned a combined salary of $40,000, reported as the husband’s income for tax purposes.
However, the court’s fact-finding revealed that most of the assets accumulated during the marriage were gifts from the wife’s family or purchased with her inheritance. Additionally, the wife’s trust fund occasionally provided for living expenses.
Division of Assets
The district court awarded the wife three-quarters of the marital assets. The husband appealed, arguing that the marital property—acquired through inheritance or gifts—belonged equally to both of them, and that he should receive a more equitable share.
The court held that pre-acquired, gifted, or inherited property could be considered part of the marital estate, but it does not have to be equally divided. Instead, the court considers both parties’ nonmonetary contributions and how these contributions helped maintain the property.
Key Disputed Assets
The main assets in question were two properties:
- Marital Home: Valued at $190,000, this property was gifted to the couple by the wife’s father.
- Vacation Property: Valued at $525,000, this property was inherited by the wife’s father and then gifted to the couple. The father also paid for most of its upkeep.
The court awarded both properties to the wife.
Additionally, there were four retirement accounts, including $41,000 in jointly contributed funds and $120,000 derived from the wife’s inheritance. These accounts were divided nearly equally, although the wife received a slightly higher amount.
Court Ruling
The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s ruling, emphasizing that the wife contributed more financially, both parties contributed equally in non-financial ways, and the husband had a greater future earning power than the wife.
Conclusion
Equitable distribution is complex, and outcomes vary depending on the specifics of each case, the jurisdiction, and the presiding judge. To ensure a fair result in your divorce case, it’s essential to have a strong legal advocate on your side.