Mintz v. Mintz
Mintz v. Mintz, 2022 UT App 17 (Mortensen, J.)
Family and Civil Procedure
The Mintzes were married twenty years and enjoyed a lavish lifestyle, yearly investments, and an extra-marital affair. On appeal and cross-appeal, they raise various issues for review. The Utah Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part, holding in relevant part:
- The district court applied the incorrect standard to the evidence regarding investments and savings that the Mintz’s had yearly deposited into their accounts and incorrectly entered unsupported findings of fact.
- The district court failed to award Mrs. Mintz with half of Mr. Mintz’s dissipation on his extra-marital affair.
- The district court correctly determined that once the notice of appeal was filed, it lacked jurisdiction to amend the divorce decree, as was required by the relief Mrs. Mintz sought—even if that relief was titled “motion to enforce.”
- The district court did not abuse its discretion when it determined that Mr. Mintz did not own his own book of business.
- On cross-appeal, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it did not count Mrs. Mintz’s investment returns as income toward her ability to meet her living expenses.