200305844 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse

200305844 divided. In the present case, although both parties received gifts, inheritances, or premarital property, the evidence does not clearly trace that property to identifiable existing assets. Property of petitioner has been commingled with income received during the marriage and respondent's inheritance dissipated for family purposes. Thus, no credits can be given to either party for premarital or inherited property. Respondent also claims a credit of $6500.00 for the value of the 1995 Windstar van. Respondent claims that cash money received from her mother's estate was used to purchase a van which was later traded in on the Windstar van. IIowever, there is no evidence as to the trade -in value or the value of the van at the time the Windstar was purchased. No credit should be allowed for the van. Additionally, the respondent claims credit for improvements made to the home in the amount of $4,754.00. Generally, when a party uses money from that party's separate estate to purchase, for example, a house which is then held in joint tenancy, the payment of money will be treated as creating a rebuttable presumption that a gift was intended from one party to the other and, therefore, the house will be considered part of the marital estate. Gerard -Ley vs. Ley, 5 Neb. App. 229 (1996). Thus, because there was no evidence to rebut the presumption that the contribution to the jointly held property was other than a gift, no credit shall be allowed. 9. Petitioner shall receive as his sole and separate property the following items of property: a. All of his own personal effects and clothing and the personal effects and clothing of the minor children. b. All items of household furniture, furnishings, equipment and miscellaneous property now in his possession, including the following, but excluding those items specifically awarded to the respondent: All property highlighted in husband's column on the attached property statement. -7-