Holterman v. Holterman

814 N.E.2d 765 (2004)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

H and W married in 1981. H was a third-year student at medical school. W had a Master's degree in business administration, was employed full time as a program analyst and her income contributed to the support of the household. H graduated from medical school in 1983 and obtained his license to practice medicine the following year. We began experiencing significant health problems and was eventually diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia. W became a homemaker due, in part, to her chronic health problems. Their first child was born in 1985 and a second child was born in 1991. H received his license to practice medicine in New York, and they moved to Albany. Since that time, husband has been an emergency room physician at a hospital, earning a salary of $181,837 in 2000. W commenced an action for divorce in September 2000. The court dissolved the marriage based on H's constructive abandonment of W; awarded wife maintenance of $35,000 per year for five years and $20,000 per year thereafter for the remainder of her life; determined that W was entitled to $214,200 as her equitable share of husband's enhanced earnings premised on his medical license; ordered H to pay child support for their two children in the amount of $34,875.65 annually; distributed the marital property, including equally dividing $242,815.39 in retirement and investment accounts; gave W title and possession of the marital residence and set H's half share of the parties' equity in the marital home at $29,268.48; obligated W to pay the mortgage, home equity loan payments and taxes on the residence (totaling about $ 26,500 per year); required H to maintain certain health and life insurance policies for the benefit of wife and the children; divided equally a tax refund check and a mortgage escrow refund check; ordered husband to reimburse wife for certain expenses pertaining to the children; and directed H to contribute $ 20,894 toward W's counsel and expert fees. The Appellate Division affirmed almost everything and granted H's leave to appeal. The Appellate Division determined that the marital portion of H's medical license had a present-day value of $ 612,000. The court determined that W was entitled to 35% of the value of H's enhanced earning capacity as a licensed physician, which amounted to $ 214,200 less the $ 29,268.48 for H's conveyance of his interest in the marital residence for a distributive award of $ 184,931.52 owed to W. H claimed that this was excessive and should only be 10%.