Background
Michelle and James Turner divorced in January 2023 under a property-settlement agreement stating that both had fully disclosed their assets. Later that year, Michelle moved for relief from the judgment, alleging that James had failed to disclose or had misrepresented interests connected to his law firm, Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC, including a capital account and firm-owned real estate.
After reopening the case for discovery, the family court conducted a final hearing. It found that James’s nondisclosure of the capital account was negligent and amended the divorce decree to give Michelle 22.13% of any capital-account payments James receives in the future. It denied relief as to the real-estate interest and awarded Michelle one-third of her requested attorney’s fees and costs, or $15,211.76.
The Court’s Holding
The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed both January 26, 2026 family-court orders. It held that the family court did not clearly err or abuse its discretion by treating the capital-account distributions as contingent future payments rather than assigning a present value and ordering an immediate offset payment.
The record supported the family court’s reliance on James’s expert, who calculated Michelle’s marital share as $88,522—22.13% of the $400,000 fully funded capital account—and testified that future distributions were contingent. The appellate court also upheld the partial fee award because the family court considered the applicable attorney-fee factors and permissibly accounted for Michelle’s degree of success on her claims.
Key Takeaways
- A family court may divide a marital interest through a share of future payments when receipt and value are contingent.
- An appellate court will defer to a family court’s expert-witness assessment and factual findings absent clear error.
- A fee award in a divorce case may reflect the requesting party’s degree of success, even when other fee factors favor an award.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the difference between a presently valued marital asset and a contingent right to future payments. Where future distributions are uncertain, West Virginia family courts may set each spouse’s percentage share for payment if and when the funds are received.
It also confirms that a successful party need not recover all requested attorney’s fees. The family court retains discretion to award a proportionate amount after considering the results obtained and the other governing factors.