Kingston v. Kingston

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Kingston v. Kingston

Additional Case Names
Case Number
Court Number
Call Date
May 10, 2022
Case Time
9:30 AM
Case Summary

A-21-582, Laura A. Kingston (Appellant) v. Trevor L. Kingston (Appellee/Cross-Appellant)

Douglas County District Court, Judge Timothy P. Burns

Attorney for Appellant: Benjamin M. Belmont, Wm. Oliver Jenkins (Brodkey, Cuddigan, Peeples, Belmont & Line, LLP)

Attorney for Appellee: Adam R. Little, Hannah C. Sommers (Nebraska Legal Group)

Civil Action: Dissolution of Marriage

Action Taken by the Trial Court: After trial, the district court entered a decree of dissolution, dissolving the marriage between the parties, awarding the parties joint physical and legal custody of two children born to the marriage, ordering child support, resolving parenting matters, and dividing the marital estate.  After entry of the decree, Appellant filed a motion to alter or amend, and Appellee filed a motion for order nunc pro tunc. In a subsequent order, the court sustained Appellant’s motion in part and sustained Appellee’s motion in full. Thereafter, Appellee filed a motion to reconsider, however, prior to resolution of that motion, Appellant filed a notice of appeal to this court, and Appellee cross-appealed.

Assignments of Error on Appeal: Appellant assigns that the district court erred in (1) awarding joint physical custody, (2) denying spousal support, (3) failing to include income from all sources for purposes of calculating child support, (4) excluding retention shares, dividends, and appreciation of investment accounts from the marital estate, (5) failing to apply the “time rule” to premarital retention shares, and (6) determining that appreciation of various investment accounts was passive as opposed to active.

Assignments of Error on Cross-Appeal: Appellee assigns that the district court erred in (1) including a portion of Appellant’s student loan debt in the marital estate, (2) granting in part Appellant’s motion to alter or amend, (3) denying Appellee an opportunity to be heard on the motion to reconsider, (4) failing to make reciprocal a provision related to reimbursement of child care expenses, and (5) ordering Appellee to pay $10,000 of Appellant’s attorney fees.

Case Location
Omaha Oral Arguments
Court Type
District Court
Schedule Code
Panel Text
Pirtle, Chief Judge, Bishop and Welch, Judges