Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

[U] Griffin v. Griffin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

February 27, 2014

SANDRA E. GRIFFIN, Appellee
v.
TIMOTHY GRIFFIN, Appellant SANDRA E. GRIFFIN, Appellee
v.
TIMOTHY GRIFFIN, Appellant

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

Appeal from the Order entered on October 26, 2012 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Family Court Division, No. FD 09-007294-004

Appeal from the Orders entered on December 28, 2012 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Family Court Division, No. FD 09-007294-004

BEFORE: PANELLA, OLSON and MUSMANNO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM

MUSMANNO, J.

Timothy Griffin ("Husband") appeals from the trial court's Order entered on October 26, 2012, which denied his Motion for reconsideration regarding the disposition of his and Sandra E. Griffin's ("Wife") marital assets.[1] Husband also appeals the Orders entered on December 28, 2012, which, pursuant to Wife's Motion to enter QDROs, required Husband to open an IRA account and directed Wife's retirement accounts to fund Husband's IRA. We deny the Motion to quash and affirm the Orders.

Husband and Wife were married on July 1, 2000. The parties did not have children during the marriage. Wife filed a Complaint in Divorce on February 17, 2009. Husband filed an Answer and Counterclaim, seeking, inter alia, spousal support/alimony and attorneys' fees. At the time of the filing for divorce, Wife was 53 years old and worked as a claims adjuster for State Farm Insurance. Husband was 42 years old, a high school graduate, and worked as an auto mechanic at time of the divorce filing.

In August 2009, an interim support order for Husband was entered. Wife disputed the numbers utilized in determining Husband and Wife's respective incomes, as Husband's income from a side business was not included. On November 30, 2009, a complex support hearing was held to determine the appropriate spousal support Wife owed to Husband. At the hearing, Husband stated that he had earned money, which was not included in his income calculation, from conducting vehicle repairs out of his home. Husband also testified that he had directed six witnesses, subpoenaed by Wife, to not appear at the support hearing. Following the hearing, Wife filed a Motion for sanctions due to Husband's conduct with regard to the subpoenaed witnesses. On December 3, 2009, the trial court granted Wife's Motion for sanctions, terminated the interim support Order and dismissed Husband's claims for alimony and attorneys' fees. Husband filed a Motion for reconsideration, which the trial court denied.

On April 7, 2010, a divorce Decree was entered. Thereafter, Husband filed a Petition for special relief, seeking the reinstatement of his alimony/attorneys' fees claims, and the interim support Order. The trial court denied Husband's Petition. Husband filed appeals from this Order and the December 3, 2009 Order. This Court quashed the appeals as interlocutory.

On September 19, 2012, after a trial, the Honorable Kathryn Hens-Greco entered an equitable distribution Decree that provided for a 50/50 distribution of the parties' assets. Judge Hens-Greco ordered Wife to pay Husband $13, 218.09 for his interest in the marital residence, and directed Wife to fund Husband's retirement account with the martial portions of her State Farm Insurance pension plan and her Roth IRA accounts. On September 24, 2012, Judge Hens-Greco entered an amended Order requiring Wife to pay Husband his interest in the marital residence within thirty days, but leaving the rest of the September 19, 2012 Order intact. Thereafter, Wife filed a Motion for clarification to correct mathematical errors in the distribution scheme. On October 16, 2012, Judge Hens-Greco entered an amended Order correcting the mathematical errors in the distribution scheme. Wife filed a Motion for reconsideration of the October 16, 2012 Order, seeking the trial court's permission to use her 401(k) retirement account to fund the retirement portion of the distribution to Husband.

In the interim, Husband filed a Motion for reconsideration of the Orders entered on September 19, 2012, and September 24, 2012. The Motion was presented to the Honorable Kathleen Mulligan. On October 19, 2012, Judge Mulligan entered an Order stating that since Judge Hens-Greco had entered a new order on October 16, 2012, the time to consider Husband's Motion for reconsideration would run from October 16, 2012. Judge Mulligan further stated that Judge Hens-Greco would dispose of the Motion on October 26, 2012.

On October 26, 2012, Judge Hens-Greco granted Wife's Motion for reconsideration and allowed her to use her 401(k) account to fund Husband's retirement account. Judge Hens-Greco also set forth the division of all of the marital assets, utilizing her findings from the previous three Orders. By a separate Order, Judge Hens-Greco also denied Husband's Motion for reconsideration. Husband filed a Notice of appeal from the denial of his Motion for reconsideration. The trial court ordered Husband to file a Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b) concise statement. Husband filed a Concise Statement and the trial court issued an Opinion.[2]

On December 28, 2012, Wife filed a Motion to enter QDROs. On that same date, the trial court entered three Orders ("QDRO Orders") requiring Husband to open an IRA account, directing Wells Fargo to fund Husband's IRA account in the amount of $7, 202.97, and directing State Farm to fund Husband's IRA in the amount of $34, 528.03. Husband filed timely appeals of the QDRO Orders. The trial court ordered Husband to file Rule 1925(b) concise statements. Husband timely filed Concise Statements and the trial ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.