Tobler v Tobler

Husband appealed the district court’s denial of his motion to bifurcate and the parenting time, child support, alimony and property division provisions of the divorce decree. The panel affirmed in part and remanded in part. It first noted that, due to a change in Utah law, husband’s failure to marshal evidence in support of his arguments was no longer a ground to reject his arguments and the panel would therefore review the merits of those arguments. It affirmed the denial of the bifurcation motion and the entry of temporary orders holding the district court’s concerns about lengthening the time to dispose of the case were sufficient to deny the motion and the temporary orders were not an abuse of discretion. The panel affirmed the parenting time order holding that it was in the best interests of the children to have the same parenting time schedule as the children were close in age and testimony established the need of the oldest child to be with the younger children. The panel remanded the child support calculation holding that while the district court correctly ruled that husband usually and ordinarily received overtime based on the tax returns admitted into evidence, it was unclear if the district court actually gave husband credit for certain expenses involving a rental home and thus a remand was necessary for further fact finding. The panel held that husband failed to provide any meaningful legal or factual support to his arguments that alimony runs from the date of the first order and not the final judgment and all his arguments about property division and thus the panel summarily affirmed on those issues. Finally, the panel held wife did not demonstrate that an award of attorney fees on appeal was warranted and thus her motion for fees was denied.