Heard in the Court of Appeals August 26, 2014.
Wake County. No. 12 CVD 9258.
Allen & Spence, PLLC, by Scott E. Allen, for plaintiff-appellee.
Manning, Fulton & Skinner, P.A., by Michael S. Harrell, for defendant-appellant.
BRYANT, Judge. Judges McGEE and STROUD concur.
Appeal by defendant from equitable distribution judgment entered 28 August 2013 by Judge Christine Walczyk
in Wake County District Court.
Where defendant failed to present evidence of potential tax consequences before the close of evidence, the trial court was not required to consider those potential tax consequences when entering an equitable distribution judgment. Although the Kelley Blue Book falls within Rule 803(17) as a hearsay exception, defendant was not prejudiced by the omission of such evidence where defendant was permitted to give opinion testimony as to the value of the marital cars. Where defendant failed to show that a monetary gift to the marital couple was not marital property, the trial court properly considered that money as part of the marital assets.
On 2 July 2012, plaintiff Rosemary Lynn Grove Parker filed a complaint against defendant Thomas Alfred Power seeking equitable distribution, divorce from bed and board, and a temporary restraining order to prevent defendant from wasting marital assets. Defendant answered and counterclaimed for alimony and post-separation support, equitable distribution, and expenses and attorneys' fees.
On 21 May 2013, plaintiff and defendant filed a joint dismissal in which plaintiff dismissed her claim for divorce from bed and board and defendant dismissed his claim for alimony and post-separation support.
A hearing on the parties' competing equitable distribution claims was held on 8 April 2013 in Wake County District Court, the Honorable Christine Walczyk, Judge presiding. On 28 August, the trial court entered a judgment for equitable distribution between the parties. Defendant appeals.
On appeal, defendant raises three issues as to whether the trial court erred in: (I) not considering the tax consequences arising from its equitable distribution judgment; (II) in excluding defendant's Kelley Blue Book values for the marital cars; and (III) in not deducting ...