IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RICHARD MASON QUAYLE AND DEANNE SUE QUAYLE Upon the Petition of RICHARD MASON QUAYLE, Petitioner-Appellant, And Concerning DEANNE SUE QUAYLE, Respondent-Appellee.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-291 / 08-1509
Filed May 29, 2009
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF RICHARD MASON QUAYLE
AND DEANNE SUE QUAYLE
Upon the Petition of
RICHARD MASON QUAYLE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
And Concerning
DEANNE SUE QUAYLE,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Hancock County, John S. Mackey,
Judge.
The petitioner appeals the spousal support provision of a dissolution
decree. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
J. C. Salvo and Bryan D. Swain of Salvo, Deren, Schenck & Lauterbach,
P.C., Harlan, for appellant.
Julie A. Schumacher of Mundt, Franck & Schumacher, Denison, for
appellee.
Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Eisenhauer and Mansfield, JJ.
2
MANSFIELD, J.
This is an appeal from a dissolution decree. Petitioner Richard Quayle
contends the district court erred in awarding spousal maintenance to respondent
Deanne Quayle. We affirm the decree as modified herein.
I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS.
Richard and Deanne were married in 1981. At the time of trial, they were
each fifty years old. During their marriage, they had five children. Three of them
were still minors: Jesse, age sixteen, Levi, age fourteen, and Isaiah, age twelve.
Deanne has a nursing degree from Morningside College. Richard has an
agricultural education degree from Iowa State University. For the first year of
marriage, Deanne continued to work as a nurse, but she stopped when the
couple’s first child was born in 1982. Two years later, in 1984, the Quayles
moved to Richard’s hometown, Forest City. During the ensuing years, Richard
worked out of the home, generally in farming and for Winnebago Industries, while
Deanne stayed home and focused on raising the children. The children were
homeschooled, primarily by Deanne but with some assistance from Richard.
Richard’s total income from farming and from working at Winnebago is
approximately $58,000 to $60,000 annually.
However, he testified to some
concerns about the future at Winnebago, where he works as a distribution
analyst, given the economic downturn and the prospect of further lay-offs at the
company.
In August 2006, Richard and Deanne separated. Richard asked Deanne
to leave the home. Deanne took the three minor children with her, but less than
two months later, she returned to drop them off.
Richard arranged
3
homeschooling for a period of time, but then put the children in the Forest City
public schools.
Since October 2006, the children have been residing with
Richard. Deanne has been living with her mother and sister in Danbury while
caring for her mother, who has Alzheimer’s. Richard presented proof, however,
that Deanne could reactivate her registered nurse status fairly easily, and that
there are well-paying nursing jobs available.1
In March 2007, Richard petitioned for dissolution of marriage. The parties
reached agreement on property distribution, but they went to trial in June 2008
over physical care of the children, child support, and alimony. Following the trial,
the district court awarded Richard physical care of the children, ordered Deanne
to pay between $241 and $385 child support (depending on the number of
children remaining in Richard’s care), and ordered Richard to pay $1200 per
month in alimony, the amount requested by Deanne.2
In awarding Deanne $1200 per month in alimony, the district court
reasoned that the parties had engaged in “what some might regard as an
archaically traditional marriage in which Richard provided financially and Deanne
kept the home and home-schooled the children.” The court further reasoned that
while “certainly Deanne can reactivate her nursing license,” her age and
prolonged absence from the job market “would make it difficult for her to find
1
The evidence showed that Deanne could reactivate her license by paying $225 and
undergoing a modest amount of continuing education. Additionally, Richard introduced
evidence that in Mason City, Deanne could earn between nineteen and twenty-nine
dollars an hour working as a nurse. However, Deanne testified the closest hospital to
Danbury is a small rural hospital thirty minutes away.
2
The district court ordered that Richard could deduct the amount of Deanne’s required
child support payments from his alimony payments to her.
4
employment in the job market.” Finally, the court concluded that Richard’s net
monthly income was $3724.69 and his monthly expenses were $2665.
Richard now appeals, arguing that the district court erred in awarding
alimony.
II. ANALYSIS.
Dissolution actions are tried in equity; thus, our review is de novo. Iowa R.
App. P. 6.4; In re Marriage of Becker, 756 N.W.2d 822, 824-25 (Iowa 2008). We
give weight to the district court’s factual findings, especially when concerning the
credibility of witnesses, but are not bound by them. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(6)(g);
In re Marriage of Anliker, 694 N.W.2d 535, 539 (Iowa 2005).
In making a spousal support award, the district court must consider the
factors set forth in Iowa Code section 598.21A(1) (2007). Anliker, 694 N.W.2d at
540. “Although our review of the trial court’s award is de novo, we accord the
trial court considerable latitude in making this determination and will only disturb
the ruling when there has been failure to do equity.” In re Marriage of Olson, 705
N.W.2d 312, 315 (Iowa 2005); see also In re Marriage of Hansen, 733 N.W.2d
683, 704 (Iowa 2007) (upholding court of appeals’ modification of district court’s
alimony award where necessary to do equity).
Richard argues that he should not pay any spousal maintenance. Deanne
insists the district court’s award of $1200, the full amount she had requested,
was correct and should be affirmed. Upon our de novo review, we conclude
spousal maintenance is warranted in this case, but that the district court’s award
should be modified to do equity.
5
The district court concluded, and we agree, that for many years Deanne
gave up her nursing career for the benefit of the children.
This was a joint
decision. She has been out of the job market for approximately twenty-five years
while her efforts at home enabled Richard’s career to progress.
This
consideration clearly supports an award of alimony in this case. See Iowa Code
§ 598.21A(1)(a), (b), and (e) (requiring the district court to consider the length of
the marriage, the age and health of the parties, and earning capacity, which
includes a length of absence from the job market, in making a spousal support
award); see, e.g., Becker, 756 N.W.2d at 826 (discussing that where the parties
were married twenty-two years, their decision to have the wife abandon her work
outside of the home hindered her ability to maximize her earning capacity during
the marriage).
However, we do not agree with the district court’s finding that it would be
“difficult for [Deanne] to find employment in the job market.”
There was
unrebutted evidence that Deanne could readily reactivate her nursing credentials
and that there is an ongoing demand for nurses. Furthermore, Deanne’s own
testimony reveals that she could go back to nursing, but instead has chosen to
care for her mother:
Q. Now is there any reason [when you separated] why you
didn’t go back to become a nurse? A. At this point—this point in
time—I believed I was to care—help care for my parents.[3]
...
Q. You’re contributing your life, if you will, for free to your
mother because that’s what you choose to do? A. It’s—it’s
needed, yes.
...
3
Deanne’s father was in a nursing home at the time of separation, but had passed away
before trial.
6
Q. It’s your choice? A. Yes.
Deanne testified further:
Q. Do you at any time in the foreseeable future see yourself
reactivating or going back to school for your nursing license?
A. Possibly.
No one would suggest that Deanne’s desire to care for her elderly mother
is less than laudable. However, in reviewing an award of spousal maintenance,
we are required to look at Deanne’s earning capacity.
See Iowa Code §
598.21A(1)(e) (requiring that the earning capacity of the party seeking
maintenance be considered in making a spousal support award). The record
shows Deanne has the qualifications and the ability to make money as a nurse.
Instead she has made her own decision to live with her mother and sister and to
care for her mother and her mother’s property. We do not believe it is Richard’s
obligation post-dissolution to enable Deanne to pursue her “choice” not to have
paid employment.
In addition, the district court’s own calculations show that when Richard’s
net monthly income is compared to his monthly expenses, the difference is
approximately $1060, which is less than the spousal support award. To us, this
suggests further that the existing monthly alimony is too high.
For the foregoing reasons, therefore, we modify the district court’s award
of spousal maintenance from $1200 to $700 per month. In all other respects, we
affirm the district court’s decree of dissolution.
On appeal, each party requests appellate attorney fees.
Appellate
attorney fees are discretionary and are determined by assessing the needs of the
requesting party, the opposing party’s ability to pay, and whether the requesting
7
party was forced to defend the appeal. In re Marriage of Gaer, 476 N.W.2d 324,
330 (Iowa 1991).
Having considered the appropriate factors, we deny each
party’s request for appellate attorney fees. Costs of appeal are divided equally
between the parties.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.
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.
