Celano and Celano

Under ORS 107.105(1)(f), in order to overcome the presumption of equal contributions, a spouse must show by preponderance of the evidence that the other spouse did not contribute equally to the asset at issue during the marriage. Kunze and Kunze, 337 Or 122, 134 (2004).

Wife appealed a judgment of dissolution. Wife assigned error to the trial court’s finding that a property was a joint martial asset. Wife argued the property was not subject to division because she paid for the property, improvements, and tax liabilities with money she inherited. Husband argued the division was appropriate given his direct and indirect contributions to the property. In order to overcome the presumption of equal contribution under ORS 107.105(1)(f), a spouse must show by preponderance of the evidence that the other spouse did not contribute equally to the asset at issue during the marriage. Kunze and Kunze, 337 Or 122, 134 (2004). The Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not error because sufficient evidence was presented for the trial court to conclude that Husband contributed to the property and Wife did not meet burden of proof to rebut the presumption of equal contribution. Affirmed.