Volume 90 — North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports

1. Divorce and Alimony 30 — equal division of marital assets equitable — sufficiency of findings to support conclusion The trial court's conclusion that an equal division of the marital assets was equitable was supported by its findings that appellant was a high school graduate and sole shareholder of his own corporation; appellee was a high school graduate with business college training and was employed as a medical secretary; and the parties owned several properties together and each maintained a separate IRA account in identical amounts.<page_number>Page 95</page_number> 2. Divorce and Alimony 30 — equitable distribution — treatment of mortgage payments and debts as alimony pendente lite In making an equitable distribution of marital assets, the trial court did not err in not allowing appellant credit for mortgage payments he made on the marital home after the parties separated, in not equally dividing the marital debts existing at separation, and in not considering appellee's alleged depletion of the marital assets by obtaining foodstuffs, gasoline, and other supplies from appellant's store, since these items were ordered as part of the award of alimony pendente lite, and giving appellant credit for any of these items would defeat the purpose of alimony pendente lite by penalizing the dependent spouse in the final distribution of the marital assets. 3. Divorce and Alimony 16.6 — alimony award — parties' accustomed standard of living — sufficiency of findings The trial court's findings were sufficient to support an alimony award of $400 per month where the trial court made specific findings with regard to the parties' ages, educational backgrounds, job status, earnings, and properties. Moreover, the court's failure to make a specific finding with regard to the couple's accustomed standard of living did not constitute reversible error where the court's findings did establish that appellee's monthly expenses exceeded her gross pay which resulted in a reduction in her standard of living; prior to separation appellant owned and operated his own business for years; appellant's annual salary exceeded his expenses; the parties owned various properties including a vacation timeshare; and these findings allowed the court to determine the couple's accustomed standard of living. 4. Divorce and Alimony 20.3 — divorce and equitable distribution — findings insufficient to support award of attorney's fees In an action for divorce and equitable distribution, a recital in the judgment that appellee's attorney rendered valuable services was insufficient to support the court's conclusion that appellee was entitled to recover $2,500 in attorney's fees.

Divorce and Alimony 30 — equitable distribution — life insurance proceeds for death of child — after separation but before divorce — separate property of plaintiff The trial court did not err in an equitable distribution action by awarding life insurance proceeds for the death of a child to plaintiff where plaintiff was the owner and beneficiary of the policy and there were no vested rights under the policy at the time of separation. The cash value of the insurance policy at the time of separation was marital property since the premiums to that point had been paid with marital assets, but the premiums after separation were paid with plaintiff's assets and therefore the proceeds from the policy were the separate property of plaintiff.

Master and Servant 77.1 — worker's compensation — back injury — return to work — increased pain — inability to work — change of condition — sufficiency of evidence The Industrial Commission's finding of fact that a substantial change occurred in plaintiff's condition was supported by competent evidence where plaintiff and her husband testified that her condition was worse after she went back to work than it was when the Industrial Commission determined that she had a 15% permanent partial disability of the back; they also testified that she was not able to work in the mill or to do her housework; her doctor testified that her condition had changed considerably and she needed further treatment for the condition; she had more limited motion and spasm in the muscles; and the doctor testified that she could not work. N.C.G.S. <cross_reference>97-47</cross_reference>.