Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Don't miss
Home / Opinions / Courts / Court of Appeals, Southern District / Domestic Relations: Property Distribution – Insurance Proceeds – Valuation

Domestic Relations: Property Distribution – Insurance Proceeds – Valuation

(1)Where insurance proceeds resulted in the reduction of a couple’s farm mortgage, and the insurance policy was titled in both names of a couple involved in a dissolution, the premiums were paid with marital funds and the two were joint owners of the insurance policy at issue, the husband did not succeed in arguing under the source of funds rule that the proceeds were his separate property, and the trial court did not err in finding that the reduction in the farm mortgage was marital property.

(2)Where a husband argued that a two-year delay between the valuation of evidence presented at trial and the distribution was prejudicial, the husband failed to meet his burden to produce evidence so cannot argue now that the court erred in using stale values, and the husband did not show prejudice, so the point is denied.

(3)Where husband purchased a double-wide mobile home he had the burden and opportunity to present evidence of its value, so the trial court was free to use the installment contract as evidence of the home’s value, and the husband failed to show prejudice, and the judgment of property distribution is affirmed over the husband’s remaining claims of error. 

Judgment is affirmed.

Foster v. Foster (MLW No. 64653/Case No. SD31851 – 10 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Rahmeyer, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Barry County, Head, J. (Cordelia F. Herrin, Cassville, for appellant) (Thomas W. Millington, Springfield, for respondent).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)