Hunley v. Hunley

<p>[Cite as Hunley v. Hunley, 2020-Ohio-5053.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLERMONT COUNTY TINA MARIE HUNLEY, : CASE NO. CA2019-12-101 Appellee, : OPINION 10/26/2020 : - vs - : THOMAS FRANKLIN HUNLEY, : Appellant. : APPEAL FROM CLERMONT COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION Case No. 2018DRB00536 Tina Marie Hunley, 1506 Commons Drive, Milford, Ohio 45150, pro se Robert G. Kelly, 4353 Montgomery Road, Cincinnati, Ohio 45212, for appellant M. POWELL, P.J. ¶ 1 Appellant, Thomas Hunley (&quot;Husband&quot;), appeals a decision of the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Division, granting him a divorce from appellee, Tina Hunley (&quot;Wife&quot;), dividing the parties' assets, and ordering spousal support. ¶ 2 Husband and Wife were married October 5, 1991 and have two emancipated children. Wife filed a complaint for divorce on May 10, 2018. Husband answered and filed Clermont CA2019-12-101 a counterclaim for divorce. Although several pretrial hearings and settlement conferences were held, the parties had difficulty agreeing on issues during the course of the litigation. The parties owned a towing business, A&amp;B Towing, and because of the parties' inability to agree on the manner of closing the business, the court appointed a receiver to sell the business assets and dissolve the business. ¶ 3 A final hearing on the divorce was held before a magistrate on February 11 and 15, 2019. The magistrate issued a decision granting the complaint and counterclaim for divorce and dividing the parties' assets and liabilities. Each party was ordered to pay half of the receiver's fee and Husband was ordered to pay spousal support to Wife. Husband filed objections to the magistrate's decision, and on September 10, 2019 the trial court issued a decision and entry on the objections. ¶ 4 Husband now appeals the trial court's decision, raising five assignments of error for our review. We begin our discussion with appellant's first and second assignments of error, which both challenge the trial court's decision to award spousal support to Wife. ¶ 5 Assignment of Error No. 1: ¶ 6 THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN AN AWARD OF SPOUSAL SUPPORT TO THE APPELLEE WITHOUT EVIDENCE SUPPORTING ALL FACTORS CONTAINED IN R.C. 3105.18(C) ABUSES ITS DISCRETION TO MAKE AN AWARD OF SPOUSAL SUPPORT [SIC]. ¶ 7 Assignment of Error No. 2: ¶ 8 TRIAL COURT ERRED IN THE USE OF THE FINPLAN TO SET SUPPORT WITHOUT EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD REQUIRED BY R.C. 3105.18(C) TO SUPPORT THE USE OF THE CALCULATIONS USED BY THE TRIAL COURT TO MAKE AN AWARD OF SPOUSAL SUPPORT. ¶ 9 First, we note that Husband argues in his brief that Wife only requested -2- Clermont CA2019-12-101 temporary spousal support until she could obtain new employment. However, the record is clear that Husband knew spousal support was an issue. At the start of the final hearing, the trial court discussed the issues which had been stipulated prior to the hearing and clarified the issues to be decided.1 The court indicated &quot;the issue of spousal support ...</p><br>
<a href="/opinion/4800173/hunley-v-hunley/">Original document</a>

Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on, it is strongly advised to avoid Hunley v. Hunley in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Hunley v. Hunley. Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Hunley v. Hunley is rated 1 out of 5 based on the complaints submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased complaints.
The above complaints and comments against Hunley v. Hunley were submitted by user(s) and have been published as-is. does not edit, alter or remove content published by it’s users. There’s no amount of money a business can pay to manipulate their complaints and will NOT entertain any request to remove the complaint on Hunley v. Hunley at any cost whatsoever.