In a case that demonstrates the intricacies of equitable division of marital property, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court in Jefferson County. The case of Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown illustrates the importance of maintaining a clear record on appeal and emphasizes the necessity of full disclosure when dividing marital assets.

The parties were married in January 2000 and separated in June 2021 after a 21-year childless marriage. The husband and wife both filed, seeking divorce and the equitable division of the parties’ marital property. During the proceedings, the wife also filed a motion for contempt, alleging that the husband “improperly disrupted the financial status quo of the parties.” The trial court held a hearing, in which the husband claimed that he had produced the requested documents. The exception was a life-insurance policy, as the husband claimed he did not own one. The trial court denied the wife’s motion for contempt and entered a final judgment divorcing the parties and dividing their marital property. Following the judgment, the wife filed a motion claiming new information about investment accounts that the husband had not disclosed. Her motion was denied by operation of law, giving rise to this appeal.

On appeal, the wife argued that the trial court exceeded its discretion by denying a hearing on her motion. She claimed that Rule 59 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure allowed for such a hearing, and cited Alabama precedent reiterating that point. As a counterargument, the husband pointed out that the wife had never expressly requested a hearing on the matter. In spite of this, the Court found that the wife was still entitled to a hearing, shifting the question to whether the error in denying the hearing was harmless.

Upon review, the Court could not ascertain whether the documents in question had been provided to either the wife or the court. In the absence of this information, the Court was unable to conclude that the failure to conduct a hearing was harmless. This holding does not mean that the error was harmful, but rather that the record was insufficient for the Court to rule on the merits in either direction. As a result, the Court reversed the denial of the wife’s motion, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown serves as an example of the different factors involved in ensuring a fair and equitable division of marital property. The Court recognized the wife’s interest in accessing a full picture of her husband’s assets from the marriage, while simultaneously acknowledging their own inability to fairly rule on the merits of her claim.

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Ingram Law LLC at 205-335-2640. Get Relief Get Results.