Opinion · Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Dusenberry v. Dusenberry
Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 73 N.C. App. 177 (N.C. Ct. App. 1985)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- Jurisdiction
- North Carolina
- Date
- 1985-02-19
- Topic
- general
WHICHARD, Judge. This is an equitable distribution action pursuant to G.S. 50-20, 21, in which the court concluded as a matter of law that an equal division of the marital property was not equitable. It did so based in part upon findings that defendant-wife “began having an adulterous affair . . . and began neglecting the plaintiff and their three minor children” and that this conduct “was a major reason for the break-up of this marriage . . . and . . . was the only serious and significant mistreatment of either party by the other party during the course of this marriage.” It concluded that con *178 sideration of “the relative fault of the parties leading to the disintegration of their marriage . . . [was] just and proper.” Subsequent to entry of this order, this Court held that fault is not a relevant or appropriate consideration in determining an equitable distribution of marital property. Hinton v. Hinton, 70 N.C.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Dusenberry v. Dusenberry. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
This is an equitable distribution action pursuant to G.S. 50-20, 21, in which the court concluded as a matter of law that an equal division of the marital property was not equitable. It did so based in part upon findings that defendant-wife “began having an adulterous affair . . . and began neglecting the plaintiff and their three minor children” and that this conduct “was a major reason for the break-up of this marriage . . . and . . . was the only serious and significant mistreatment of either party by the other party during the course of this marriage.” It concluded that con *178 sideration of “the relative fault of the parties leading to the disintegration of their marriage . . . [was] just and proper.”
Subsequent to entry of this order, this Court held that fault is not a relevant or appropriate consideration in determining an equitable distribution of marital property. Hinton v. Hinton, 70 N.C. App. 665, 321 S.E. 2d 161 (1984); see also Wade v. Wade, 72 N.C. App. 372, 325 S.E. 2d 260 (1985); Smith v. Smith, 71 N.C. App. 242, 322 S.E. 2d 393 (1984). The award here is clearly grounded upon fault-based findings regarding an adulterous affair on the part of defendant-wife. Because the court considered this irrelevant and inappropriate matter in awarding the marital property, the order must be vacated and the cause remanded for a new order based solely upon relevant and appropriate findings.
Vacated and remanded.
Judges WELLS and BECTON concur.