## Facts

- Beth and Leon Whelchel married in Texas in 1975 and later had three children.
- During the marriage, the parties opened and maintained an investment account in Texas.
- Leon had pension rights from a prior employer that accrued, at least in part, before the marriage; funds tied to those premarital pension rights were later deposited into the Texas investment account.
- In 1986, the family moved to Iowa, but the parties continued to keep the investment account in Texas and continued to make contributions to it during the marriage.
- In 1990, the parties sought dissolution of the marriage in Iowa.
- Iowa is an equitable-distribution state that divides property in a manner that is fair, not necessarily equal.
- Beth challenged the district court’s property division on appeal, focusing on the Texas investment account and arguing that Texas community-property law should control the account’s classification and division.

## Issues

1. In an Iowa dissolution proceeding, must the court apply Texas community-property law to a Texas-based investment account, or may it apply Iowa equitable-distribution law?
2. Under Iowa law, was it equitable for the district court to treat the investment account as partly Leon’s premarital property (traceable to premarital pension rights) and partly marital property subject to division?

## Decision

- The Iowa Court of Appeals reviewed the dissolution decree de novo, while giving weight to the district court’s fact findings, particularly on credibility and disputed factual questions.
- The court held that Iowa law governed the property division in this Iowa dissolution proceeding, including the Texas investment account, and it rejected Beth’s argument for applying Texas community-property law.
- The court affirmed the district court’s treatment of the investment account as having both premarital and marital components and concluded the overall property division was equitable under Iowa law.
- The dissolution decree was affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- Dissolution actions in Iowa are equity cases; appellate review is de novo, with weight given to the trial court’s factual findings, especially those tied to witness credibility.
- In an Iowa dissolution, Iowa’s equitable-distribution statute governs the division of property; an equitable division is one that is fair in light of the whole record, not automatically a 50/50 split.
- Iowa courts may consider premarital property in making a fair property division; premarital origin is a factor that can justify awarding a greater share of a particular asset to one spouse.
- When an asset reflects both premarital and marital sources (including later contributions and growth during the marriage), a court may reasonably apportion the asset so that the premarital component is treated differently from the marital component.
- The mere fact that an asset is located in another state, or that the parties previously lived in a community-property state, does not require an Iowa dissolution court to replace Iowa’s statutory property-division framework with another state’s marital-property rules.

## Conclusion

The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the dissolution decree, holding that Iowa equitable-distribution law governed the division of the parties’ property, including a Texas investment account, and that the district court acted fairly in treating the account as partly Leon’s premarital, pension-related property and partly marital property subject to division under Iowa law.


In re the Marriage of Whelchel, 476 N.W.2d 104 (1991)