Ward v. Ward

MacDaniel, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a Decree of Divorce entered August 7, 1980, in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County. ³⁰⁸ Appellant Emma P. Ward challenges those portions of the chancellor’s decree pertaining to the disposition of marital real property. Essentially, she argues that the chancellor misconstrued and misapplied Title 3, Subtitle 6A (Property Disposition in Divorce and Annulment) of the Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article. We agree and shall remand for further proceedings.

Appellant Emma P. Ward and appellee Ronald Harold Ward were married in 1965. No children were born of the marriage. In 1973 the parties purchased a residence in Clinton, Maryland, which was titled in both names as tenants by the entireties. In May 1977 and September 1977 the parties entered into two separate land installment contracts for two separate lots in New Jersey.

These contracts fell into default in June 1978. Thereafter appellee entered into new contracts for these two lots in his own name. The parties first separated in 1976 and, except for brief periods of reconciliation, remained so until their divorce in 1980. Appellant instituted proceedings on February 13, 1979, by filing a Bill of Complaint for Divorce a mensa et thoro, alleging cruelty and constructive desertion. 1 Appellee answered and on August 6, 1979, filed a Cross-Bill of Complaint for Divorce a vinculo matrimonii on the ground of adultery.

The case came on for trial on March 17 and 18, 1980, and on August 7, 1980, the chancellor entered his Order denying appellant’s bill, granting appellee’s cross-bill, and making certain dispositions as to the parties’ marital property, some of which are the subject of this appeal. Appellant takes issue with the following rulings by the chancellor contained in his "Order of Court” dated August 7, 1980: 2 ³⁰⁹ "ORDERED, that the defendant/cross-plaintiffs interest in the property known as 12404 Tove Court, Clinton, Maryland be and it is hereby declared to be a total interest, less $10,000, and it is further ORDERED, that the plaintiff/cross-defendant’s interest in the property known as 12404 Tove Court, Clinton, Maryland be and the same is hereby declared to be $10,000, and it is further ORDERED, that the defendant/cross-plaintiffs interest in the properties known as Lot No. 1, Block No. 10, Delaware Bay Estates, Bridgeton, New Jersey, Lawrence Township; and in lot No. 9, Block No. 33, Egg Harbor Manor, Mays Landing, New Jersey, be and it is hereby declared to be a total interest, and it is hereby...” Those portions of Title 3, Subtitle 6 A — Property Disposition in Divorce and Annulment — of Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann. (1980 Repl.

Vol.) applicable to the issues are: "3-6A-04 REAL PROPERTY (a) When granting an absolute divorce or annulment, the court may resolve any dispute between the spouses with respect to the ownership of real property. However, the court may not transfer the ownership of real property from one spouse to the other. (b) In accordance with the court’s determination of the ownership of real property, the Court may: (1) Grant a decree which states what the ownership interest of each spouse is; and (2) As to any jointly held property, order a partition or sale in lieu of partition and a division of the proceeds. 3-6A-05. MONETARY AWARD IN ADJUSTMENT OF PARTIES’ RIGHTS IN MARITAL PROPERTY.

(a) In granting an absolute divorce or annulment, or at any time within 90 days ³¹⁰ thereafter, if in its decree granting the divorce or annulment the court has expressly reserved the power to do so, the Court shall determine which property is marital property if the division of property is an issue. Family use personal property or the family home shall not be considered marital property so long as it is the subject of a use and possession order. (b) The court shall determine the value of all marital property. After making the