Palin v. Palin
Annotate this CaseAt issue in this appeal was whether a family court justice erred in finding that loans taken out by Defendant JoAnne Palin to pay for the the college educations of her and Plaintiff Steven Palin's children were not marital debt. JoAnne argued on appeal that the loans at issue should have been considered marital debt by the trial justice because they were incurred during the marriage and were for the benefit of the couple's children. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that in light of the trial justice's findings that JoAnne's testimony was less than credible, the loans were signed by JoAnne without Steven's consent, the documentary evidence of the loans was never introduced into evidence as to whether the loans were actually for the benefit of either child, and at the time the loans were taken out, the family was in dire financial straits, the trial justice's exclusion of these loans from the marital estate was a sustainable exercise of his discretion to classify and assign marital debts.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.