E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2RDM03

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING AND MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING UPON THE PETITION OF Case No. 02811 CDDM001883 MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , PETITIONER, AND CONCERNING MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , RESPONDENT. On September 23, 2013 , the above-entitled matter is presented to the Court for attention. The Petition for Dissolution of Marriage has been on file for more than 90 days. The Court finds that this matter should be scheduled for trial pursuant to district administrative rule number 2.7. IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE COURT as follows: 1. This matter shall be scheduled for trial by the court administrator as soon as practicable. One day has been allocated for trial. The parties shall inform the court administrator if additional time is required. 2. If a party believes that this case should be exempted from automatic assignment for trial, the parties shall file an application for exemption, stating the reasons therefore, within ten days of the filing of this order. The application shall be signed personally by the party making the application. A copy shall be sent to the court administrator. The application shall be brought to the attention of the Court in the manner of a motion. 3. Not later than five days prior to the trial, the parties shall exchange exhibits and exhibit list(Petitioner to use numbers and Respondent to use letters.) Further, the following shall be filed with the clerk of court at the same time: (a) Each party's current affidavit of financial status, if not previously filed;
1 of 3

ORDER FOR TRIAL ON PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE

E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

(b) Each party's child support guidelines worksheet (if applicable and not previously filed); (c) Each party's certificate of completion of Children in the Middle (if applicable); (d) The pretrial stipulation form prescribed by the Court, which shall contain each party's proposal for resolution of all pending issues.

If you need assistance to participate in court due to a disability, call the disability coordinator at 641-421-0990. Persons who are hearing or speech impaired may call Relay Iowa TTY (1-800-735-2942). Disablity coordinators cannot provide legal advice.

CLERK TO FURNISH COPIES TO: RICHARD SCOTT RHINEHART MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR Petition File Date: 06/25/13

2 of 3

E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001883 Type: Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING ORDER DIRECTING CT. ADMIN. TO SET TRIAL DATE So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2013-09-23 15:13:57

3 of 3

E-FILED 2013 JUL 15 12:45 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 JUL 22 3:10 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 JUL 22 3:11 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 JUL 24 10:46 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2RDM03

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING AND MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING UPON THE PETITION OF Case No. 02811 CDDM001883 MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , PETITIONER, AND CONCERNING MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , RESPONDENT. On September 23, 2013 , the above-entitled matter is presented to the Court for attention. The Petition for Dissolution of Marriage has been on file for more than 90 days. The Court finds that this matter should be scheduled for trial pursuant to district administrative rule number 2.7. IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE COURT as follows: 1. This matter shall be scheduled for trial by the court administrator as soon as practicable. One day has been allocated for trial. The parties shall inform the court administrator if additional time is required. 2. If a party believes that this case should be exempted from automatic assignment for trial, the parties shall file an application for exemption, stating the reasons therefore, within ten days of the filing of this order. The application shall be signed personally by the party making the application. A copy shall be sent to the court administrator. The application shall be brought to the attention of the Court in the manner of a motion. 3. Not later than five days prior to the trial, the parties shall exchange exhibits and exhibit list(Petitioner to use numbers and Respondent to use letters.) Further, the following shall be filed with the clerk of court at the same time: (a) Each party's current affidavit of financial status, if not previously filed;
1 of 3

ORDER FOR TRIAL ON PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE

E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

(b) Each party's child support guidelines worksheet (if applicable and not previously filed); (c) Each party's certificate of completion of Children in the Middle (if applicable); (d) The pretrial stipulation form prescribed by the Court, which shall contain each party's proposal for resolution of all pending issues.

If you need assistance to participate in court due to a disability, call the disability coordinator at 641-421-0990. Persons who are hearing or speech impaired may call Relay Iowa TTY (1-800-735-2942). Disablity coordinators cannot provide legal advice.

CLERK TO FURNISH COPIES TO: RICHARD SCOTT RHINEHART MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR Petition File Date: 06/25/13

2 of 3

E-FILED 2013 SEP 23 3:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001883 Type: Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING ORDER DIRECTING CT. ADMIN. TO SET TRIAL DATE So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2013-09-23 15:13:57

3 of 3

E-FILED 2013 SEP 24 2:38 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Notice Id: 2CA004

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , Plaintiff / Petitioner, vs. MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , Defendant / Respondent. Notice of Civil Trial Setting Conference Case No: 02811 CDDM001883

A scheduling conference will be held on 10/17/13 at 11:00 AM with Kellie Orres, as District Court Designee, pursuant to I.R.C.P 1.602. This conference shall be conducted by telephone conference call initiated by plaintiff's counsel. Kellie Orres may be contacted via telephone at: (515) 574-3752. 1. PARTICIPATION: All attorneys appearing in the case shall participate in this conference. A party who is not represented by counsel shall contact the Court Administrator's office (at the above phone number) prior to the date and time of the conference call. 2. TRIAL SCHEDULING: A firm trial date shall be established in accordance with the Supreme Court's time standards as provided by Chapter 23, Iowa Court Rules. NO CONTINUANCES SHALL BE GRANTED EXCEPT BY COURT ORDER, UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN. 3. SANCTIONS: If a party or attorney fails to participate in the scheduling conference or is substantially unprepared to participate in the conference, the Court may impose appropriate sanctions, including reasonable expenses and attorney fees. (I.R.C.P 1.602(5)).

/s/ Kellie Orres --------------------------------------Designee of the Court Clerk to provide copies or notice of document to attorneys of record and parties appearing

E-FILED 2013 SEP 24 2:38 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

pro se.

Recipient List Case ID : 02811 CDDM001883 - MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL E-FILED 2013 LYNN SEP 24HOEFLING 2:38 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Event Cd : OFTN RICHARD SCOTT RHINEHART ERIN ELIZABETH MCCULLOUGH filed filed

E-FILED 2013 OCT 15 10:12 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 OCT 21 3:30 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Notice Id: 2CA101

IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , Plaintiff / Petitioner, vs. MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , Defendant / Respondent. Case No: 02811 CDDM001883 Trial Notice

The above entitled matter is hereby scheduled for non-jury trial on 02/11/14 at 09:00 AM . 1 Day Property/Visitation Discovery Due 60 days prior to trial

/s/ Kellie Orres ----------------------------------Designee of the Court

Clerk to provide copies or notice of this document to attorneys of record, parties appearing pro se and judge if assigned

Docket Code = OSTR

Recipient List Case ID : 02811 CDDM001883 - MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL E-FILED 2013 LYNN OCT 21HOEFLING 3:30 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Event Cd : OSTR RICHARD SCOTT RHINEHART ERIN ELIZABETH MCCULLOUGH filed filed

E-FILED 2013 NOV 04 10:06 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2014 JAN 02 3:30 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2014 JAN 10 3:26 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE: THE MARRIAGE OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING AND MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING ****************************************************************************** MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING, * EQUITY NO. CDDM001883 * Petitioner, * * MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND CONCERNING * * MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING, * * Respondent. * ****************************************************************************** COMES NOW the Mistaya Hoefling, Petitioner herein, and moves the Court for a continuance in the above case. In support thereof Petitioner states to the Court as follows: 1. 2. 2. Trial in this case is set for February 11, 2014. Both parties own stock in a family trucking business. On December 12, 2013, Petitioner emailed to Respondents attorney a Joint

Stipulation in an effort to begin settlement negotiations. 3. On December 17, 2013, the Respondents attorney emailed the Joint Stipulation

back to our office with their revisions. After reviewing their revisions, the only issues at hand were based around the children. 4. On January 3, 2014, we emailed our revisions to the Joint Stipulation back to the

Respondents attorney. 5. On January 9, 2014, we received an email from Respondents attorney that he was

not agreeing to the settlement dollar amount as it related to the corporate shares of this trucking business. We had discussed hiring an expert to value the Hoefling Trucking business with our client early on, but decided against it since the business settlement dollar amount was not an issue in their revision of December 17, 2013. The cost of a full-fledged evaluation exceeds

E-FILED 2014 JAN 10 3:26 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

$3,500 and Petitioner was not going to incur that cost if it was not necessary. 6. Petitioner and the undersigned were making good faith efforts to settle this matter

out of Court. Petitioner will now have to hire and expert to value the business and there is not time for that with the trial being one month away. Had Petitioner known that this was an issue an expert would have been hired in December to prepare for trial. 7. Respondent resists a continuance of the trial in this case. The Court would be

benefitted by a business evaluation prepared by an expert. WHEREFORE the Petitioner requests that the Court enter an Order allowing this Motion for Continuance and for whatever other relief the Court deems just and equitable in its premises. DATED this 10th day of January, 2014. RHINEHART LAW, P.C.

BY R. Scott Rhinehart, #AT0006666 505 5th St., Ste. 310 Sioux City, IA 51101 (712) 258-8706 (712) 233-3417 (fax) courts@rhinehartlaw.com ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was served upon all parties to the above cause to each of the attorneys of record herein at their respective addresses disclosed on the pleading on January 10, 2014. By: _____ U.S. Mail ______ Facsimile _____ Hand delivered ______ Overnight courier __X__ Efile _____ Other ____________________________ Signature /s/ Melissa Johnk

E-FILED 2014 JAN 13 10:49 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2014 JAN 13 10:49 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2014 JAN 27 12:23 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2RDM01

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

IN RE: THE MARRIAGE OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING AND MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING

UPON THE PETITION OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , PETITIONER, AND CONCERNING MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , RESPONDENT. ORDER Case No. 02811 CDDM001883

Motion for Continuance came on for telephonic hearing by agreement of the parties on January 23, 2014. A review of the file indicates that trial notice was filed on October 21, 2013, following a trial setting conference. The notice scheduled the trial for February 11, 2014. It provided one day property/visitation. It further directed that discovery was due 60 days prior to trial. It appears that respondent is involved in a family trucking business and that there are six outstanding shares, each party in this case having one share. Respondent made an offer to settle this matter conditioned on acceptance by December 23, 2013. The offer was not so accepted. Petitioner filed her Motion for Continuance seeking time to retain an evaluation expert. Notwithstanding the filing of the Motion on January 10, 2013, this Court first became aware of the Motion on January 22, 2014. In this Court's view, the parties have had adquate time to prepare for the trial. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial is overruled.
1 of 3

E-FILED 2014 JAN 27 12:23 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

CLERK TO FURNISH COPIES TO: RICHARD SCOTT RHINEHART ERIN ELIZABETH MCCULLOUGH DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR

2 of 3

E-FILED 2014 JAN 27 12:23 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001883 Type: Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING OTHER ORDER So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2014-01-27 12:24:31

3 of 3

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 1:58 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2RDM02 IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING AND MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING UPON THE PETITION OF Case No. 02811 CDDM001883 MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , PETITIONER, AND CONCERNING MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING , RESPONDENT. COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM (The court reporter shall file this memorandum with the district court clerk.) Appearances: For Plaintiff/Petitioner: Scott Rinehart For Defendant/Respondent: Erin McCullough Other: Information required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): I, Tara Gibson, am providing the following information as required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): 1. The type of proceeding that was reported: Dissolution 2. The date(s) on which the proceeding occurred: February 11, 2014 3. The name of the court reporter who reported the proceeding: Tara Gibson 4. The name of the judge who presided over the proceeding: Gary McMinimee 5. The reporting fee for the proceeding: $40.00 6. We, the undersigned judge before whom the above-entitled case was tried, and the official court reporter who, by order of the Court, reported the same, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is the report of the whole proceedings upon the trial and/or hearing of the above-entitled cause made and taken pursuant to the order and direction of the Court, in accordance with Iowa Code Section 624.10. /s/Tara Gibson _________________________________________
1 of 3

COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 1:58 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

2 of 3

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 1:58 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001883 Type: Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2014-02-11 13:59:34

3 of 3

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 2:10 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING , Plaintiff, vs. MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING ,

Case No: 02811 CDDM001883 EXHIBIT LIST Dissolution February 11, 2014 Presiding Judge: Gary McMinimee

Defendant.

The following exhibits were offered and admitted by the Court at the hearing as shown above: Petitioner's Exhibits 1. Pay stub. 2-8 Not offered 9. Balance sheet 1/19/13 10. Balance sheet 1/2/12 11. Balance sheet 1/30/11 12. Photos of kids 13. Photo of Mistaya and A.H. 14. Photo of Mistaya and G.M. 15. Photo with Mistay's parents 16. Photos of the inside of home 17. Information on Cerebral Palsy 18. Information on Garner's Syndrome 19. IPERS statement 20. Child support 21. Affidavit of attorney fees

Respondent's Exhibits 101. Hoefling Trucking Tax returns years 2005-2012 102. Respondent's 2013 W-2 103. Petitioner's 2013 Salary 104A. Hoefling Trucking Truck and Trailer payments

1 of 3

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 2:10 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

104B. Hoefling Outstand debts 105. Child support Guidelines Worksheet 106A. House appraisal by Swanson 106B. House payoff 107. Not entered into evidence 108. Ron Muhlbauer CPA letter and balance sheet 109. Petitioner and Respondent's Personal Tax Returns 110. House photos 111. House appraisal by MJG Appraisal for Mortgage 112. Respondent's Insurance benefits and cost

Court Exhibit 100. Pretrial Stipulation

2 of 3

E-FILED 2014 FEB 11 2:10 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001883 Type: Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING EXHIBIT LIST So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2014-02-11 14:11:05

3 of 3

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage Of MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING and MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING Upon The etition Of MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING! etitioner! And Con"erning MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING! Re#pondent$ On February 11, 2014, this dissolution matter came on for trial to the Court. The parties appeared with their attorneys of record. FINDINGS OF FACT &$ The parties met on February 14, 2004 and were married on May 2 , 2004. NO$ CDDM%%&''( FINDINGS OF FACT! CONCLUSIONS OF LAW! and ORDER! )UDGEMENT and DECREE

The !etition was filed on "une 2#, 201$. Mistaya had maintained in %ood faith a residence in &owa for more than one year immediately precedin% the filin% of the !etition' her residence was not for the sole purpose of obtainin% a dissolution. Mitchell was ser(ed on "une 2), 201$ in *ac County &owa. +oth parties, throu%h the time of trial, resided in the marital residence at $00 ,alnut, Odebolt, &owa, where they had li(ed for the pre(ious se(en years. *$ The !etition was filed in %ood faith and for the purposes set forth therein.

The alle%ations material to the dissolution of the marria%e ha(e been established by competent e(idence. There has been a brea-down in the marria%e relationship to the e.tent that the le%itimate ob/ects of matrimony ha(e been destroyed and there remains no reasonable li-elihood that the marria%e can be preser(ed. ($ Mitchell has not commenced a separate action for dissolution of marria%e and

no such action is pendin% in any court in this state or elsewhere. +$ The parties are the parents of three children0 1.2. 3born 4o(ember 20045'

6.2. 3born 7ecember 20085' and 2.2. 3born May 200)5. Mistaya also has a child, 9.M., who was about ei%hteen months old at the time of the parties: marria%e. 9.M.:s father has ne(er been in(ol(ed in her life, althou%h he continues to pay child support of ;400 per

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

month' Mitchell has been her father fi%ure. ,$ Mistaya was born on "uly $1, 1 <). *he is in %ood health. *he has

supporti(e family in the Odebolt area. 2er parents mo(ed from Carroll to Odebolt about fi(e years a%o. *he has a sister in *iou. City. *he sees her sister and her children at least twice per month. Mistaya has a de%ree in education from the =ni(ersity of 4orthern &owa. *he was /ust finishin% up her schoolin% at 7M6CC in Carroll when the parties married. *he had student loans. Followin% the marria%e, she substituted at Odebolt>6rthur Community *chools and then too- a full time position with the school teachin% fifth %rade which she has done for the past fi(e years. The children attend the same school which is about two bloc-s from the parties: home. 2er annual wa%e in 200) was ; ,<))' in 200 it was ; ,12<' in 2010 it was ;22,$82' in 2011 was ;$),##1' and in 2012 was ;$8,10<. 2er wa%e for the fiscal year 201$>2014 is ;41,2#4.88. 6ppro.imately ;2,$ #.1# is withheld for &!?@*, ma-in% her current ta.able income ;$),)# .48 per year. The refund (alue of her &!?@* account is appro.imately ;12,#00. The school pro(ides her with indi(idual health insurance without costs. Mistaya does not wor- durin% the summer. *he ta-es classes to -eep her teachin% certificate up to date. -$ Mitchell was born on 6u%ust 2$, 1 <). 2e is in %ood health. Mitchell has
1

e.tended family in the area includin% his parents and se(eral siblin%s. 2e e.pects to find a residence in Oldebolt, probably li(in% with his brother. !rior to the parties: marria%e Mitchell completed a de%ree in a%riculture at &owa *tate =ni(ersity. 2e was wor-in% #0 to ## hours per wee- as a farm hand when the parties met. &n 200#, Mitchell bou%ht a truc- and be%an dri(in% for *chroeder Truc-in% in Odebolt. &n 200<, he became employed as a dri(er for his parents: business, 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC. Mitchell:s parents started 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC on "une 8, 200#. =ntil 2011, his parents were the only shareholders of the company. 2oeflin% Truc-in%, as an AAC, passes throu%h income and e.penses to its shareholders. The principle business of 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC has always been haulin% mar-et ho%s. &n 200), Mitchell had a wa%e of ;40,$00 but it appears his o(erall net income from truc-in% was about ;$0,1#2' in 200 he had wa%es of ;40,$00 but it appears his net income from truc-in% was ;28,4<<'
1 Mistaya also has an associate:s de%ree in mar-etin% which she has not used.

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

and in 2010 he had wa%es of ;41,0<# but it appears he had net truc-in% income of ;2#,14$ after deductin% his unreimbursed employee e.penses. &n 2011, the parties and Mitchell:s brother Mathew and his wife, /oined Mitchell:s parents as shareholders in 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC, each ha(in% one of the si. outstandin% shares. There was no e(idence that Mitchell, Mathew or their wi(es %a(e any consideration for the shares. &n 2011, Mitchell had wa%es of ;40,$#8, truc-in% e.penses of ;2,8$0, and unreimbursed employee business e.penses of ;1$,21 ' in 2011, each of the parties recei(ed a B>1 from 2oeflin% Truc-in%, indicatin% that their respecti(e share of ordinary income was ;12,#< and that their share of depreciation was ;10,418. &n 2012, Mitchell had wa%es of ;# , 48, out of which ;14,428.0# was withheld for health insurance. 2e had office e.pense of ;))0 and unreimbursed employee business e.penses of ;18,$21. ?ach of the parties recei(ed a B>1 indicatin% their share of ordinary loss from the corporation was ;8,018 and that their share of net *ection 12$1 %ain was ;41<. Mitchell:s ,>2 for 201$ shows wa%es of ;8$,<<2.<8 includin% ;1#,1#2.<8 withheld for medical insurance. 2e has no benefits other than his wa%e. There was no e(idence that the 2oeflin% Truc-in% has e(er distributed any funds to the parties in their capacity as owners. Mitchell:s cost to co(er himself and the children for medical insurance in 2014 will be ;1,142.88 per month. The cost to co(er him alone would be ;4$).2 per month. The cost to Mitchell to pro(ide dental insurance for him and children will be ;120.0< per month. The cost for co(erin% himself alone for dental insurance would be ;4$.21 per month. .$ 2oeflin% Truc-in%, at present, employs Mitchell, Mathew and one other

person. &t has four ownerCoperators. Mitchell in addition to dri(in%, dispatches, schedules the dri(ers, and does a lot of the paperwor-. Mathew has a mechanic:s de%ree and, in addition to dri(in%, maintains the (ehicles in %ood condition. Mitchell:s mother pays bills and handles payroll. Mistaya has not been in(ol(ed with the company for the last fi(e years other than to pay a fuel bill on line when reDuested to do so by Mitchell:s mother and to occasionally pic- up a part. Mitchell:s parents own the land and buildin% where the truc-s are maintained. They pay the ta.es on the buildin% and land. For the last few years, 2oeflin% Truc-in% has paid for the water and utilities used by it on the site. &n 2011 2oeflin% Truc-in% had income of ;<#,4<4. &n 2012 it had a loss of

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

;$8,0 $. 4inety fi(e percent of the business of 2oeflin% Truc-in% is haulin% mar-et ho%s for Maschhoffs, AAC an &llinois company with ho% facilities in &llinois and surroundin% states. They entered into a relationship in "une 2010 but it is not an e.clusi(e haulin% arran%ement and either party can terminate the relationship at any time without conseDuences. 2oeflin% has recently been short about 1# loads, includin% two the day before trial and one on the day of trial' it anticipated bein% two short the day after. 6 serious disease in the ho% industry is impactin% the haulin% of mar-et ho%s. On "anuary $0, 2011, Mitchell:s father si%ned a financial statement for &owa *tate +an- indicatin% a net worth for the business of ;12$,<8). On "anuary 2, 2012 the ban- prepared a balance sheet indicatin% a net worth of ;201,<) . On February 28, 201$, Mitchell:s father si%ned a balance sheet prepared by the ban- on "anuary 2 , 201$ indicatin% a net worth of ;1 0,0)0. Mitchell:s mother testified the "anuary 2 , 201$ balance sheet was probably accurate. 6 balance sheet2 prepared by the ban- on "anuary #, 2014 indicated a net worth of about ;142,<)2. '$ The children ha(e health issues. 2.2. has cerebral palsy. 2e ma-es use

braces and other appliances that help him. 2e ta-es therapy that is intended to maintain his capabilities. 2e %oes to the *hriner:s 2ospital in Minneapolis four times each year where care is pro(ided without cost. The *hriners also assist with fuel costs and any necessary o(erni%ht accommodations. 6.2. has 9ardner:s *yndrome, a condition that %reatly increases the ris- of cancer. *he has a colonoscopy e(ery year. 1.2. has an orthodontic issue which will probably reDuire a sur%ery that will spread his upper /aw. 2e is also stru%%lin% with the parties: di(orce. The children are in(ol(ed in acti(ities, includin% dance and sports. The children ha(e been raised in the Catholic faith. Mitchell is Catholic. Mistaya is not. 4onetheless, the parties e.pect the children to continue to be raised within the Catholic faith. The children attend CC7 on ,ednesday e(enin%s. 7urin% the marria%e, Mistaya has been the children:s primary care pro(ider. *he re%ularly attends parent>teacher conferences and ta-es the children to medical and dental appointments. Mistaya transports the children to their acti(ities. *he lea(es school at $04# p.m. and the children sometimes wait for her. *ometimes they %o to the home of a
2 The "anuary 4, 2014 statement was not offered as an e.hibit but its contents were testified to.

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

%randparent. Mistaya considers Mitchell to be Ea lo(in% but disen%a%ed father.F *he points out he is %one two or three ni%hts per wee- and has not ta-en a (acation$ for two years. Mitchell does not belie(e he is disen%a%ed. 2e points out that he has attended some parent>teacher conferences and has ta-en the children to some medical and dental appointments. 2e camps with the children on wee-ends. Mitchell represents that he belie(es the children loo- to him for ad(ice and would be lost without him. 2e feels close to 6.2. and sometimes pic-s her up from school. 2e re%ularly hunts with 2.2. and pic-s him up from school when he can' 2.2. always -nows where he is. 1.2. often wal-s from school and calls when he %ets home. 2e, li-e 2.2., always -nows where Mitchell is and they re%ularly (isit before bed. Mitchell ac-nowled%es that he is %one two or three ni%hts each wee- dri(in% but points out that he does not lea(e until after the children are in bed. Moreo(er, Mitchell represents that he intends to chan%e the dri(ers: schedules so that he can spend more time with the children. @ecently he has been home with the children after school. 2e represents that he is willin% to transport the children to acti(ities. The children re%ularly see both e.tended families. The children are close to both sets of %randparents. 2.2. %enerally lea(es preschool before lunch and rides the bus to Mistaya:s parents. The other children also sometimes %o there after school. Mitchell:s parents pic-ed up the parties: children from school from time to time. The children ha(e also ridden their bi-es the Mitchell:s parents: home. Mitchell:s father ma-es a special effort to %et to all of the children:s sports acti(ities. parents. Mistaya represents that conflict between the parties has caused stress within the home. *he represents that the parties cannot tal- without ar%uin% and cannot limit their con(ersations to the children. *he belie(es that te.t messa%es wor- best. /$ in Table 10 The parties ha(e the assets listed in Table 1. ,ith the e.ception of the The parties and their children ha(e traditionally spent Christmas ?(e with Mistaya:s parents and Christmas 7ay with Mitchell:s

parties: interest in 2oeflin% Truc-in%, the parties a%ree to the (alues of the assets listed

$ 6ccordin% to Mitchell, he prefers not to (acation with Mistaya:s parents. Aast year, Mistaya and the children accompanied Mistaya:s parents to !aris. Mitchell was in(ited after Mistaya:s sister bac-ed out of the trip.

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Ta01e &
ropert2 Rea1 E#tate 2ome>$00 ,alnut, Oldebolt, &6 4ehi"1e# 2012 Che(y *uburban 2008 Ford F2#0 Ho5#eho1d "ontent# Frid%e ,ashin% Machine Birby 1acuum "ohn 7eere lawn mower #0F flat screen t( Furniture Retire6ent A""o5nt# Mistaya &!?@* Se"5rite# Two shares of 2oeflin% Truc-in% Tota1 Mar3et 4a15e ; 48,000.00 De0t ; 24,)$0.00 Net 4a15e ; 21,1<0.00 Mi#ta2a ; 21,1<0.00 Mit"he11

; $#,<#0.00 ; 1<, <#.00

; $4,#18.00 ; 14,$81.22

; 1,2$4.00 ; $,81$.<)

; 1,2$4.00 ; $,81$.<)

; ; ;

#00.00 $00.00 #00.00

; ; ;

#00.00 $00.00 #00.00

; ; ;

#00.00 $00.00 #00.00

; $00.00 ; $00.00 ; 2,#00.00

; $00.00 ; $00.00 ; 2,#00.00

; $00.00 ; $00.00 ; 2,#00.00

; 12,#00.00

;12,#00.00

;12,#00.00

; 4<,# 4.00 ;184,21 .00 ; <$,<0<.22

;4<,# 4.00 ; 0,#11.<) ;$ ,$04.00

;4<,# 4.00 ;#1,20<.<)

The parties ha(e a%reed to file /oint ta. returns in 201$. +ased on the financials of 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC, Mistaya opines that each share of 2oeflin% Truc-in% stoc- has a (alue of about ;40,000. 6t Mitchell:s reDuest, @onald Muhlbauer4, a C!6 e.perienced in business operations and (aluations, prepared a balance sheet for 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC as of "uly $1, 201$ based on the information pro(ided to him. That balance sheet indicates a net worth on "uly $1, 201$ of ;1,<84. 4either the balance sheet pro(ided to the ban- nor the balance sheet prepared by Muhlbauer attributes any intrinsic (alue or %ood will to the business. &n Muhlbauer:s (iew the only %oodwill attributable to the company Eis the ability to transport the commodity in a timely and efficient matter,F which in his opinion has little or no intrinsic (alue. &n his opinion the (alue of the business is the (alue after liDuidation of assets and payment of liabilities. Muhlbauer prepared the "uly $1, 201$ balance sheet from ban- statements, loan documents, and other financial information pro(ided by 2oeflin%s, includin% appraisals he reDuested 2oeflin%s to obtain from !eterbuilt Truc- dealers and ,ilson truc- dealers. 7ifferences between Muhlbauer:s "uly $1, 201$ balance sheet and the ban-:s
4 @onald Muhlbauer is not a certified business appraiser.

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

"anuary 12, 201$ balance sheet, includes different eDuipment (alues. The "anuary 12, 201$ balance sheet indicates the eDuipment has a (alue of ;8$0,#00. There was no e(idence as to the basis of that number. The Muhlbauer balance sheet lists the eDuipment at the appraised (alue of ;#42,#00. &n addition, the Muhlbauer balance sheet shows ;)#,404 more in liabilities than the "anuary 12, 201$ ban- balance statement. Muhlbauer indicated the difference in net worth between his "uly 201$ balance sheet and the ban-:s "anuary #, 2014 balance sheet was lar%ely e.plained by the addition of ;<4,000 of assets, represented by two Che(rolet pic-ups that did not appear on the "uly 201$ balance sheet, and ;8),000 of liabilities, apparently lar%ely accounts payable, that appear on his "uly 201$ balance sheet but not on the ban-:s "anuary 2014 balance sheet. &n Muhlbauer:s opinion, the net worth of the business would not ha(e increased to ;142,<)2 in si. months. This court (alues 2oeflin% Truc-in% at the time of trial at ;142,<)2. The "anuary #, 2014 financial was apparently prepared by 2oeflin% Truc-in% with the benefit of the Muhlbauer balance sheet and with the realiGation of the February 11, 2014 trial date. The Court attributes the increase in net worth shown on the "anuary #, 2014 balance sheet from that shown on the Muhlbauer balance sheet, to be most li-ely due to some erroneous information pro(ided to Muhlbauer by 2oeflin%s, but also to successful business operations durin% the second half of 201$. &%$ Mistaya and her father represent that based on Mistaya:s e.perience in

payin% monthly bills she will need about ;1200 to ;1$00 in addition to her salary from school to meet her monthly e.penses. *he estimates on her financial statement that her e.penses will be ;84#0 per month, includin% ;$8# for house payment 3includin% insurance and ta.es5, ;<00 for meals and food, ;$00 for clothin%, ;10<1 for car and transportation e.pense 3includin% *uburban payment of ;<0)5, ;)0 for medical and dental e.pense, ;1# 1 for utilities and telephone e.pense, ;2200 for other e.penses and ;14$ for student loans. 2er health insurance is pro(ided without cost by her employer and she e.pects to co(er 9.M. throu%h 2aw-eye. Mitchell is of the (iew that Mistaya spends money too freely, especially when usin% her credit card. Mitchell has su%%ested to Mistaya that she replace the *uburban with a mini(an which he belie(es would substantially reduce her estimated (ehicle e.pense. Mistaya has no interest' she li-es the roominess and safety of the lar%er

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

(ehicle. &&$ Mystaya:s father testified he has made loans to Mistaya of ;$#00 and ;8#00 Mistaya has incurred attorney fees of

for attorney fees and household e.penses.

;)1 <.#0. Mitchell represents he too has borrowed the money to pay his attorney. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW &$ parties. *$ ($ +$ Conciliation should be wai(ed. The parties are entitled to the dissolution prayed for in the !etition. EH6I court, insofar as is reasonable and in the best interest of the child, His toI This Court has /urisdiction of the sub/ect matter of the action and of the

order the custody award, includin% liberal (isitation ri%hts where appropriate, which will assure the child the opportunity for the ma.imum continuin% physical and emotional contact with both parents after the parties ha(e separated . . . and which will encoura%e parents to share the ri%hts and responsibilities of raisin% the child unless direct physical harm or si%nificant emotional harm to the child, other children, or a parent is li-ely to result from such contact with one parent.F &owa Code *ection # ).413153a5. The parties a%ree to /oint le%al custody of the children and this court concurs. &t is in the children:s best interest that the parties ha(e EeDual participation in decisions affectin% HtheirI le%al status, medical care, education, e.tracurricular acti(ities, and reli%ious instruction.F &owa Code *ection # ).13$5. The parties also a%ree that Mistaya should ha(e physical care of the children. EPhysical care means the ri%ht and responsibility to maintain a home for the minor child and pro(ide for the routine care of the child.F &owa Code *ection # ).13<5. The parties do not a%ree re%ardin% (isitation. Mitchell reDuests (isitation e(ery other wee-end, ,ednesday and Thursday ni%hts of each wee-, alternate holidays and si. wee-s each summer be%innin% on "une 1. 2e wants ,ednesdays because of CC7. Mistaya wants (isitation limited to e(ery other wee-end, one school ni%ht from the time school %ets out until <000 p.m., and three wee-s of summer (isitation. *he belie(es the children will spend much of his (isitation time with his family. Mistaya wants the children on Christmas ?(e when her family traditionally celebrates Christmas, with Mitchell ha(in% the children on Christmas 7ay' that is the practice that the parties established

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

durin% the marria%e and there is no reason it should not continue. Considerin% Mitchell:s relationship with his children durin% the marria%e and his intentions re%ardin% ma-in% more time for his children, Mitchell should ha(e the liberal (isitation set forth in this Order. ,$ The property sub/ect to eDuitable di(ision in a dissolution action is %enerally

the property e.istin% at the time of trial, other than inherited property or %ifts recei(ed by one person. &owa Code *ection # ).213#5. &t includes premarital property. In re Marriage of Fennelly and Breckenfelder, <$< 4.,.2d < 3&owa 200<5. 7ebts as well as assets are to be eDuitably di(ided between the parties. *ee In re Marriage of Smith, $#1 4.,.2d #41, #4$ 3&owa 6pp. 1 )45. 2ere the parties ha(e debts and the assets set forth in Table 1 sub/ect to eDuitable di(ision. &owa Code *ection # ).213#5 sets forth the criteria for ad/udicatin% the eDuitable distribution of the property. E6lthou%h an eDual di(ision is not reDuired, it is %enerally reco%niGed that eDuality is often most eDuitable.F In re Marriage of Rhinehart, <04 4.,.2d 8<<, 8)$ 3&owa 200#5. The assets should be distributed as set forth in Table 1. @e%ardin% 201$ income ta.es, the parties should eDually share any ta. refunds and should be eDually responsible for any ta. liabilities. @e%ardin% debts, Mistaya should pay her debt to her parents and her student loans. Mitchell should pay his loan to his parents. To ma-e the distribution of property eDuitable, Mitchell should pay to Mistaya the sum of ;8 #1.) 3;# #1.) to eDualiGe the assets and ;1000 for Mistaya to apply toward her loan from her parents for household e.penses5. -$ The parties a%ree that Mitchell should continue to maintain health insurance

on the children. The parties should share unco(ered medical e.penses in accordance with the child support %uidelines. .$ The parties disa%ree on dependency e.emptions. Mitchell reDuests that he

be awarded all three children as dependents until Mistaya is no lon%er able to claim 9.M. as a dependent. Mistaya reDuests that she be awarded the two youn%er children as dependents and that Mitchell be awarded 1.2. as a dependent so lon% as he is current on his support' when 1.2. can no lon%er be claimed as a dependent, she reDuest that she continue to be able to claim 2.2 as a dependent and that Mitchell be awarded 6.2. so lon% as he is current on his support' and when 6.2. can no lon%er be claimed as a dependent, the parties shall alternate claimin% 2.2. so lon% as Mitchell is current on his child support. 6t trial she su%%ested each party claim one of the older children, and alternate the

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

youn%est' she indicated she did not care who claimed the youn%est in 2014. &n this court:s (iew the dependency e.emptions as most fairly di(ided as set forth in this order. '$ Mitchell should pay child support in accordance with the followin% Child

*upport 9uideline ,or-sheet0

I. Net Monthly Income of Petitioner, Mitchell Hoefling [ ] Custodial Parent [X] Noncustodial Parent [ ] Joint Physical Care Petitioner claims 1 child as tax dependents Sources and Amounts of Annual Income: !"!#$% B. Federal Tax Deduction: +ross #nnual !axa,le -ncome less 1.* self/employment 01-C#2 tax% less federal ad6ustments to income less personal exemptions, self plus 1 dependents less standard deduction filing as single Net taxa,le income / federal% 1ederal !ax $ia,ility% 1ederal !ax Credits 1inal federal tax lia,ility% State Tax Deduction: +ross #nnual !axa,le -ncome% less 1.* self employment 01-C#2 tax% less federal tax lia,ility 0ad6usted for dependent tax credit2 less standard deduction filing as single Net taxa,le income / state% ;tate tax lia,ility 0ta,les2% &(,*(1 *4 less pers.dep credits% 394 445 plus school district surtax 04<2 4 44 less tax credits 34 445 1inal state tax lia,ility% Social Security and Medicare Tax Mandatory Pension Deduction: #nnual earned income% -ncome not su,6ect to 1-C#% &4 44 #pplica,le rate 0) ':< or 1: (< as ad6usted2 #nnual ;ocial ;ecurity and Medicare tax lia,ility "ther Deductions #Annual$: 1 Mandatory occupational license fees% * =nion dues% ( #ctual medical support paid pursuant to court order or administrati>e order in another order for other children, not the pending matter% 8 Prior o,ligation of child support and spouse support actually paid pursuant to court or administrati>e order% : ?eductions for 4 additional @ualified dependents% ' Child care expenses% 0present action2 less federal tax credits% less state tax credits% less state tax refund% Net child care expenses% &'(,))* )' 34 445 3),744 445 3',*44 445 &87,')* )' &9,*)8 88 31,444 445 3),*)8 885 &'(,))* )' 34 445 3),*)8 885 31,7*4 445 &:8,:)9 (* &'(,))* )'

A.

C.

3(,1:1 *45 &'(,))* )'

D.

38,9)9 '*5 34 445 34 445 34 445 34 445 34 445 &4 44 34 445 34 445 34 445 34 445 &89,8'9 :4 &8,4(7 48 &4 44 &8,4(7 48

!.

Preliminary Net Annual Income: Preliminary A%era&e Monthly Income of Petitioner ) Monthly Cash Medical ;upport ordered in this pending action Ad'usted Net Monthly Income of Petitioner

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

II.

A.

N!T M"NT()* INC"M! "F +!SP"ND!NT, Mistaya Hoefling [X] Custodial Parent [ ] Noncustodial Parent [ ] Joint Physical Care Aespondent claims * children as tax dependents Sources and Amounts of Annual Income: !"!#$% &81,*:8 ''

B.

Federal Tax Deduction: +ross #nnual !axa,le -ncome 0&*,(7: 1: untaxed2 less 1.* self/employment 01-C#2 tax less federal ad6ustments to income less personal exemptions, self plus * dependents less standard deduction filing as head of household Net taxa,le income / federal% 1ederal !ax $ia,ility% 1ederal !ax Credits for ?ependent Children 1inal federal tax lia,ility% State Tax Deduction: +ross #nnual !axa,le -ncome% less 1.* self employment 01-C#2 tax% less federal tax lia,ility 0ad6usted for dependent tax credit2 less standard deduction filing as Head of Household Net taxa,le income / state% ;tate tax lia,ility 0ta,les2% &1,)(: 1* less pers.dep credits% 31'4 445 plus school district surtax 04<2 4 44 less tax credits 34 445 1inal state tax lia,ility% Social Security and Medicare Tax Mandatory Pension Deduction: #nnual earned income% -ncome not su,6ect to 1-C#% &4 44 #pplica,le rate 0) ':< Bages or 1: (< self/employment as ad6usted2 #nnual ;ocial ;ecurity and Medicare tax lia,ility "ther Deductions #Annual$: 1 Mandatory occupational license fees% * =nion dues% ( #ctual medical support paid pursuant to court order or administrati>e order in another order for other children, not the pending matter% 8 Prior o,ligation of child support and spouse support actually paid pursuant to court or administrati>e order% : ?eductions for 1 additional @ualified dependents% ' Child care expenses% 0present action2 less federal tax credits% less state tax credits% less state tax refund% Net child care expenses%

&(9,9:7 :1 34 445 311,9:4 445 37,144 445 &1),747 :1 &*,4(9 7( 3*,444 445 3(9 7(5 &(9,9:7 :1 34 445 3(9 7(5 38,)84 445 &(8,494 :9

C.

31,:): 1*5 &81,*:8 ''

D.

3(,1:: 795 34 445 34 445 34 445 34 445 3(,(44 ()5 &4 44 34 445 34 445 34 445 34 445 &((,198 *' &*,)': (' &4 44 &*,)': ('

!.

Preliminary Net Annual Income: Preliminary A%era&e Monthly Income of +es,ondent ) Monthly Cash Medical ;upport ordered in this pending action Ad'usted Net Monthly Income of +es,ondent III. Calculation of the -uideline Amount of Su,,ort Custodial Parent [ ] Petitioner [X] Aespondent # #d6usted Net Monthly -ncome &*,)': (' C Noncustodial Parent [X] Petitioner [ ] Aespondent &8,4(7 48 D

Com.ined

&',948 84

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E C ?

Proportional ;hare of -ncome Num,er of Children for Fhom ;upport is ;ought Easic ;upport ",ligation =sing "nly NCPGs #d6usted Net Monthly -ncome Easic ;upport ",ligation =sing Com,ined #d6usted Net Monthly -ncome Hach ParentGs ;hare of the Easic ;upport ",ligation =sing Com,ined -ncomes NCPGs Easic ;upport ",ligation Eefore Health -nsurance Cost of Child0ren2Gs Health -nsurance Premium ICalculation o>erride Aeasona,le NCP cost is &*': )* Health -nsurance #dd/"n or ?eduction 1rom NCPGs ",ligation +uideline #mount of Child ;upport for NCP

84 '84)<

:7 (:7(<

144< (

N.#

&1,7'9 44

&)77 91

&1,1'9 17 &1,1'9 17

+ H

&4 44

&)91 *(

/&(1) :4 &9:4 '7

/. SP!CIA) FINDIN-S # -ncome imputed to Aespondent% -ncome imputed to Petitioner% Hstimated income of Aespondent% Hstimated income of Petitioner% ?e>iations made from Child ;upport +uidelines% Ae@uested amount of child support per month

C ?

/I. Chan&es in Child Su,,ort ".li&ation as Num.er of Children !ntitled to Su,,ort Chan&es 01or cases Bith multiple children ,ased on present income and applica,le guidelines calculation method2% /I. a. Basic ".li&ation Num,er of Children * 1 NCPGs Easic ;upport ",ligation &1,44' )( &)4' (9 Health -nsurance #dd/on or ?eduction /&(1) :4 /&(1) :4 Hxtraordinary Jisitation Credit &4 44 &4 44 +uideline #mount of Child ;upport &'97 *( &(99 99

'$

76limony is a stipend to a spouse in lieu of the other spouse:s le%al obli%ation

for support.F In Re Marriage of Francis, 442 4.,.2d # , 82 3&owa 1 ) 5. 6limony may be used to remedy the ineDuities in a marria%e and to compensate a spouse who lea(es the marria%e at a financial disad(anta%e. In re Marriage of Geil, #0 4.,.2d <$), <42 3&owa 1 $5. Case law in &owa has reco%niGed three types of alimony0 traditional, rehabilitati(e,

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

and reimbursement. In re Marriage of Probasco, 8<8 4.,.2d 1< , 1)4 3&owa 20045. Traditional alimony is Epayable for life or for so lon% as a spouse is incapable of self> support.F Id. @ehabilitati(e alimony is Ea way of supportin% an economically dependent spouse throu%h a limited period of reeducation or retrainin% followin% di(orce, thereby creatin% incenti(e and opportunity for that spouse to become self>supportin%.F Id. @eimbursement alimony Eis predicated upon economic sacrifices made by one spouse durin% the marria%e that directly enhance the future earnin% capacity of the other.F In re Marriage of Francis, 442 4.,.2d # , 84 3&owa 1 ) 5. 6 court need not desi%nate which type of alimony it awards and it may award a combination of different types of alimony. In re Marriage of Becker, <#8 4.,.2d )22, )2< 3&owa 200)5. Mistaya reDuests alimony of ;<#0 per month for ten years. *he contends that she needs ;12#0 3in the form of child support andCor alimony5 in addition to her wa%es to support herself and the children. Mitchell ta-es the position that there should be no alimony award because, in his opinion, she li(es beyond what she can afford and that her income and support is sufficient for her needs. 6 court may %rant alimony at its discretion after considerin% E315 the earnin% capacity of each party, and 325 present standard of li(in% and ability to pay balanced a%ainst the relati(e needs of the other,F 3In re Marriage of Estlund, $44 4.,.2d 2<8, 2)13&owa 1 )$55, to%ether with rele(ant factors listed in &owa Code *ection # ).216 @ele(ant factors here include EHtIhe len%th of the marria%e.F &owa Code *ection # ).2163153a5. The marria%e of Mitchell and Mistaya lasted about nine years before the dissolution petition was filed, a marria%e of moderate len%th. EThe a%e and physical and emotional health of the partiesF 3&owa Code *ection # ).2163153b55 are also rele(ant factors. Mitchell is $# years of a%e and Mistaya is $# years of a%e. +oth parties are in %enerally %ood physical and emotional health. 6lso rele(ant is EHtIhe distribution of the property made pursuant to section # ).21.F &owa Code *ection # ).2163153c5. 6lthou%h alimony and property awards ha(e different purposes, they are closely related' they are considered to%ether in e(aluatin% their indi(idual sufficiency. In re Marriage of McFarland, 2$ 4.,.2d 1<# 3&owa 1 <85' In re Marriage of ardy, #$ 4.,.2d <2 3&owa 1 #5. The amount of alimony Emust be determined in li%ht of all circumstances, includin% the property settlement.F In re Marriage

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

of Be!ers, $28 4.,.2d ) 8, 00 3&owa 1 )25. 6 Ecourt can properly consider how the property has been di(ided in assessin% the needs and the resources of the parties in fi.in% alimony.F In re Marriage of S"arks, $2$ 4.,.2d 284, 28< 3&owa 6pp. 1 )25. 2ere, each party has recei(ed marital property appro.imately eDual in (alue. The Court notes that the award of the *uburban to Mistaya places a substantial debt burden upon her but that is what she reDuested. The Court also notes that the property payment will not be sufficient for her to pay her debt to her parents. Mitchell will lea(e the marria%e with a third interest in 2oeflin% truc-in%, but with debt to Mistaya, debt to his parents, and no place to li(e. Finally, it is appropriate here to consider EHtIhe earnin% capacity of the party see-in% maintenance, includin% educational bac-%round, trainin%, employment s-ills, wore.perience, len%th of absence from the /ob mar-et, responsibility for children under either an award of custody or physical care, and the time and e.pense necessary to acDuire sufficient education or trainin% to enable the party to find appropriate employment, Has well as tIhe feasibility of the party see-in% maintenance becomin% self>supportin% at a standard of li(in% reasonably comparable to that en/oyed durin% the marria%e, and the len%th of time necessary to achie(e this %oal.F &owa Code *ection # ).2163153e J f5. Mistaya has a de%ree in education. There is no e(idence that she wants or needs additional education or trainin% to ha(e appropriate employment. 6lthou%h Mistaya has always had primary care of the children, her marria%e did not -eep her from the /ob mar-et. &ndeed, for teachin% months of the year, she is pro(ided health insurance without cost, the &!?@* retirement pro%ram for a pre>ta. contribution of ;2,$ #.1#, and a ta.able income of ;$),)# .#1. 2er ta.able income is not si%nificantly less than what the parties earned to%ether prior to 2010 and had a(ailable for family e.penses. +ased on the child support %uideline wor-sheet, it appears that after payment of ta.es, ma-in% her &!?@* contribution, and obtainin% health insurance, she will ha(e ;$818.0# 3an ad/usted net income of ;2<8#.$8 and child support of ;)#0.8 5 a(ailable to pay her other monthly e.penses. ,ith respect to Mitchell:s ability to pay alimony, it appears that after payment of ta.es, he will ha(e ;1 2#.82 3ad/usted net income of ;40$ .04, less ;1282.<$ for health and dental insurance and less ;)#0.8 for child support5 a(ailable to fund a retirement account and pay his other monthly e.penses. &n (iew of the fore%oin%, no alimony should be awarded. &n this Court:s (iew Mistaya does not ha(e a need for alimony and if she desires additional income she can

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

supplement her income with summer employment' she also has the ability to reduce her e.penses by replacin% her *uburban with a more economical (ehicle. On the other hand, this court does not belie(e Mitchell has the financial ability to pay alimony and it appears that there is little he can do little to alter his financial situation. /$ Court costs are to be eDuitably apportioned between the parties. &owa Code

*ection 82#.$. 6ttorney fees are not allowed as a matter of ri%ht in dissolution cases. ,hether an award is %ranted depends chiefly on the financial condition and earnin%s of both parties, as well as the relati(e needs and abilities of the parties. In Re Marriage of Fish, $#0 4.,.2d 228, 2$1 3&owa 6pp. 1 )45. Mistaya reDuests that Mitchell pay the costs and contribute toward the payment of her attorney fees. Mitchell ta-es the position that each party should pay their own fees and one half of the court cost. Considerin% the property award herein and the relati(e incomes, e.penses and debts of the parties, each party should pay one half the costs and their own attorney fees. )UDGMENT AND DECREE IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED8 &$ The marria%e between the parties is dissol(ed and the parties are restored to

the same ri%hts and pri(ile%es as unmarried persons. *$ (isitation0 3a5 6lternatin% wee-ends from Friday at 4000 p.m. to *unday at <000 p.m. 3b5 ?(ery ,ednesday from 4000 p.m. to )000 a.m. on Thursday' Mitchell shall be responsible for transportin% the children to school. 3c5 Four wee-s durin% each summer, commencin% "une 1, 2014. Mistaya shall be entitled to ha(e the children for a wee-end midway throu%h Mitchell:s summer (isitation with the children 3d5 6lternatin% holidays. 7urin% odd numbered years0 ?aster, Memorial 7ay, and Aabor 7ay. Mitchell shall ha(e the children from )000 a.m. to < p.m. on these holidays. Mistaya shall ha(e the children durin% these times in e(en numbered years. The parties shall ha(e /oint le%al custody of their children. Mistaya shall ha(e

physical care of the children. =nless otherwise a%reed, Mitchell shall ha(e the followin%

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

7urin% e(en numbered years0 &ndependence 7ay and Than-s%i(in%. Mitchell shall ha(e the children from )000 a.m. to < p.m. on these holidays. Mistaya shall ha(e the children durin% these times in odd numbered years. 3e5 Christmas0 Mistaya shall ha(e (isitation from the time school lets out for Christmas (acation until 7ecember 2#th at 000 a.m. and Mitchell shall ha(e the children from 7ecember 2#th at 000 a.m. until school resumes. 3f5 Father:s day and his birthday from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. Mistaya shall ha(e the children on Mother:s day and her birthday from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. 3%5 The children:s birthdays from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. in e(en numbered years' in e(en numbered years Mistaya shall ha(e the children from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. on the day followin% the children:s birthdays. &n odd numbered years Mitchell shall ha(e the children from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. on the day followin% the children:s birthdays' in odd number years, Mistaya shall ha(e the children on their birthdays from )000 a.m. to <000 p.m. 3h5 The specified days of (isitation shall ta-e precedence o(er the wee-end (isitation. The parties shall share transportation. =nless the parties otherwise a%ree, and e.cept on Thursday mornin%s durin% the school year, Mitchell shall pic- up the children at the be%innin% (isitation and Mistaya shall pic- them up at the conclusion of (isitation. ($ Mitchell shall pay monthly child support to Mistaya throu%h the &owa 7istrict

Court for *ac County or the Collection *er(ices Center if appropriate, in the sum of ;)#0.8 commencin% on the 1st day of May, 2014 and on the 1st day of each month thereafter for so lon% as Mitchell has a support obli%ation for three children. Then he shall pay child support in the sum of ;8) .2$ per month so lon% as he has a support obli%ation for two children. Then he shall pay child support in the sum of ;$)).)) per month so lon% as he has a support obli%ation for one child. Mitchell:s child support obli%ation for a child shall continue until the child reaches 1) years of a%e, earlier marries, becomes self> supportin%, or dies' howe(er, if the child is attendin% hi%h school on a full>time basis and continues to li(e with Mistaya, the support obli%ation shall continue until the child:s 1
th

birthday. "ud%ment is hereby rendered a%ainst Mitchell for such sums as they shall become due and payable. The Court shall retain /urisdiction with respect to support of any

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

child who may be dependent on the parties because of a physical or mental disability. The parties are ad(ised that Mitchell:s income is for purposes of support sub/ect to immediate income withholdin% re%ardless of whether support payments are in arrears. Mistaya:s counsel may submit a proposed order. The Court shall retain /urisdiction with respect to post>secondary educational subsidies for the children until such time as the matter may arise. *o lon% as the parties can claim three children as dependency e.emptions, Mistaya shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption for 1.2. and, in odd numbered years, the dependency e.emption for 2.2.' Mitchell shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption for 6.2. and, in e(en numbered years, the dependency e.emption for 2.2., pro(idin% his support obli%ation is current at the end of the calendar year for which he see-s to claim the e.emption3s5. *o lon% as the parties can claim two children as dependency e.emptions, Mistaya shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption for the youn%er child and Mitchell shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption for the older child, pro(idin% his support obli%ation is current at the end of the calendar year for which he see-s to claim the e.emption. *o lon% as the parties can claim one child as a dependency e.emption, Mistaya shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption in odd numbered years and Mitchell shall be entitled to claim the dependency e.emption in e(en numbered years, pro(idin% his support obli%ation is current at the end of the calendar year for which he see-s to claim the e.emption. *o lon% as Mitchell has a support obli%ation for a child he shall pro(ide health insurance for the child. Mistaya shall pay the first ;2#0 per year per child of unco(ered medical e.penses. The balance of unco(ered medical e.penses shall be paid # .4K by Mitchell and 40.8K by Mistaya. E=nco(ered medical e.pensesF means all medical e.penses for the child not paid by insurance. EMedical e.pensesF shall include, but not be limited to, costs for reasonably necessary medical, orthodontia, dental treatment, physical therapy, eye care, includin% eye %lasses or contact lenses, mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, prescription dru%s, and any other unco(ered medical e.pense. +$ Mistaya is awarded0 65 Marital home at $00 ,alnut, Oldebolt, sub/ect to the mort%a%e which she shall pay' she shall hold Mitchell harmless on the

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

note secured by the mort%a%e' +5 C5 75 ?5 Mitchell is awarded0 65 +5 C5 2008 Ford 2#0, sub/ect to the debt thereon which he shall pay' he shall hold Mistaya harmless on the debt' 6ll shares and interest in 2oeflin% Truc-in% AAC' 6ll other property in his possession not specifically awarded to Mistaya. Mitchell shall pay the loan from his parents. Mistaya shall pay the loan from her parents and her student loans. 6ny other debt shall be paid by the party incurrin% the debt. Mitchell shall pay to Mistaya the sum of ;8 #1.) and /ud%ment is entered. The /ud%ment shall be paid within 0 days. ?.ecution shall not issue prior to 0 days. 6ny sum not paid when due shall draw interest at # percent per annum. Mitchell shall remo(e himself and his belon%in%s from the marital home within $0 days of this 7ecree. ,$ ?ach party shall do all acts necessary and con(enient to effectuate this 2012 Che(rolet *uburban, sub/ect to the debt thereon which she shall pay' she shall hold Mitchell harmless on the debt' Frid%e, washin% machine, Birby (acuum "ohn 7eere lawn mower, #0F flat screen t(, furniture' &!?@* account in her name' 6ll other property in her possession not specifically awarded to Mitchell.

decree, includin% the e.ecution of all appropriate documents. -$ ?ach party, pursuant to &owa Code *ection # ).22+315, shall file with the

Cler- of Court or the Child *upport @eco(ery =nit if all support payments are to be directed to the Collection *er(ices Center as pro(ided in &owa Code *ections 2#2+.14325 and 2#2+.18, upon entry of this decree, and update as appropriate, the parties: social security number, residential and mailin% addresses, telephone number, dri(er:s license number, and the name, address, and telephone number of the parties: employer. The information so filed shall be disclosed and used pursuant to &owa code *ection # ).22+. !ursuant to

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

&owa Code *ection # ).223+5325, the parties are hereby notified that in any child support action initiated by the Child *upport @eco(ery =nit or between the parties, upon sufficient showin% that dili%ent effort has been made to ascertain the location of such a party, the unit or the court shall deem due process reDuirements for notice and ser(ice of process to be met with respect to the party, upon deli(ery of written notice to the most recent residential or employer address filed with the Cler- of Court or Child *upport @eco(ery =nit. .$ Court costs shall be paid one half by each party.

E-FILED 2014 APR 10 1:18 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001883 OTHER ORDER Case Title MISTAYA LOUISE HOEFLING VS MITCHELL LYNN HOEFLING So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2014-04-10 13:18:00

page 20 of 20