Sandusky v. Sandusky, 218 UT App 34, February 24, 2018
This is a rare case about the division of debts. The trial court held at trial that it believed that there was a presumption of an equal division of marital debt. This case had an additional element of a loans that were not included/accounted for in a separation agreement.
Held: Marital Loans to Be Split Equally (case involes a prenuptial agreement, so ruling of trial court may be case specific and not for general application).
The trial court found that at the time of trial the parties possessed some assets that they had acquired after executing the Separation Agreement. These assets included $305,000 in loans that the parties made to three individuals using funds from their financial accounts. Because the loans were held at the time of trial and were not accounted for by the Separation Agreement, the court determined that “the most fair and equitable distribution, as well as the presumption under Utah law, . . . is to split them equally. . . . The court concluded that “the evidence at trial did not demonstrate that [the] loans were made from [George’s] separate property”; rather, “the loans were made from funds that were commingled and were not segregated.” The court also concluded that no evidence showed that the three indebted individuals had repaid the loans. Sandusky v. Sandusky, 2018 UT App 34 To read the whole case, click HERE.