Case Law Haskins v. Howe

Haskins v. Howe

Document Cited Authorities (3) Cited in Related

Orvin W. Foster, Mena, for appellant.

Brasel Law Firm, PLLC, by: Aaron R. Basel, for appellee.

STEPHANIE POTTER BARRETT, Judge

Richard Haskins appeals the Polk County Circuit Court's determination that the $45,000 appellee Sabrena Howe withdrew from the parties’ joint checking account was marital funds and that the funds were received in lieu of temporary spousal support to which she would have otherwise been entitled. Haskins argues the circuit court erred (1) in allowing Howe to keep $52,0001 because it was part of a $61,201.20 inheritance he received from the sale of his late father's house and therefore his separate property and (2) in finding Howe was alternatively entitled to the funds in lieu of temporary spousal support. We affirm.

The parties married on July 17, 2017, and separated on May 3, 2018. Howe filed her initial complaint for divorce on May 30, 2018; Haskins answered and filed a counterclaim on June 13. Howe filed an amended divorce complaint and a motion for spousal support on July 17, 2019. A final hearing was held on November 2, 2020.

At the final hearing, Howe testified that she had a separate bank account in her name only as well as the joint account with Haskins. She explained that she had deposited approximately $98,000 from the sale of her premarital home into her separate account, but she had transferred much of that money into the joint account to cover Haskins's overdrafts and other expenses. Howe admitted Haskins had deposited his $61,901.20 inheritance into the joint account in April 2018, she withdrew $45,000 from the joint account on May 2 or 3, 2018, and she placed the funds in her separate account. Howe testified she often deposited money into the joint account, made withdrawals, and wrote checks for bills from the account. Howe testified that her only income was a monthly disability check of $899, and she listed monthly expenses of $1610 on her affidavit of financial means. Howe asserted that, during the parties’ separation, she had lived on her monthly disability income and the $45,000 she had withdrawn from the joint account. Regarding her request for spousal support, Howe testified that she had numerous serious medical issues, that she was currently living on her credit card, and that she did not have any savings because it had been expended during the marriage. She testified Haskins has a good job, a 401(k), no dependents, and no car payment because he had purchased a 2014 Honda CRV for $15,000 during the marriage and titled it in his name only.

Haskins testified that Howe had never deposited her disability check into the joint account, and he was unaware of her ever depositing any money into their joint account. He admitted that he knew his inheritance was being deposited into the joint account and that both he and Howe wrote checks against the account. He told the circuit court he did not intend for Howe to have any of his inheritance, including the $45,000 she removed from the account, nor did he authorize her to write checks against those funds to pay her bills. Haskins admitted that Howe had "expensive doctors" and a lot of bills due to her medical problems. He also explained that he had received other estate monies from his parents’ estates that had paid some of his bills and some of Howe's medical bills, paid off their honeymoon, and allowed them to take a vacation. Although his affidavit of financial means was not entered into evidence, Haskins testified that he made $553.62 a week, and he has a 401(k) to which he contributes 3 percent of every paycheck.

Haskins called two married coworkers, Sunshine and Jason Glasscock, to testify. Both of the Glasscocks testified that they had heard Howe say that when Haskins received his inheritance, she was going to take it and leave him.

A final decree of divorce was entered on December 9, 2020. In the divorce decree, the circuit court found that the parties had opened a joint checking account in March 2014 prior to their marriage; that both parties had deposited funds into the account and wrote checks against the account; that Howe had withdrawn $45,000 from the joint account and used those funds for living expenses and payment of medical bills incurred during the marriage; and that the funds were determined to be jointly owned funds because Haskins failed to present clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. The circuit court also found, "The Court also determines that said funds...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex