## Facts

- Husband and wife were married for approximately 42 years and divorced in 2008; they had one adult, emancipated son who lived separately.
- Over roughly four years, husband and the adult son incurred about $65,000 in credit card debt, primarily for the son’s benefit.
- Wife did not know the credit cards existed, did not participate in obtaining or using them, and received no benefit from the spending.
- Husband concealed the activity until debt-collection calls began; statements were routed away from the marital home while husband continued making payments.
- After wife learned the magnitude of the debt and the spending continued, she filed for divorce.
- In the divorce judgment, the trial court classified the $65,000 as marital debt and assigned one-half to each spouse.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by classifying as marital, and allocating to the wife, credit card debt incurred by the husband for an adult child without the wife’s knowledge, participation, or benefit.

## Decision

- The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed.
- The court held the trial court abused its discretion in treating the $65,000 credit card balance as marital debt and assigning any portion to the wife.
- The debt, incurred to support an adult, emancipated child and concealed from the wife, could not be imposed on the wife as part of the marital debt allocation.

## Legal Principles

- Whether a debt is marital depends on factors including: whether it was incurred to acquire marital property; whether it served marital or household support purposes; the spouses’ knowledge of and participation in incurring it; and whether the marital household or both spouses benefitted.
- A trial court’s discretion in allocating debt is bounded by correct application of these factors to the evidence; misclassification that produces an inequitable allocation constitutes an abuse of discretion.
- Kentucky law does not impose a legal obligation on parents to support adult, emancipated children; voluntary debts undertaken solely for that purpose are not automatically marital obligations of the nonparticipating spouse.
- Debt existing at the time of dissolution is not marital solely because of timing; the purpose of the obligation and the non-debtor spouse’s knowledge and benefit are central to classification.

## Conclusion

The court held that allocating to the wife any portion of concealed credit card debt incurred by the husband to benefit an adult child—without the wife’s knowledge, participation, or benefit—misapplied Kentucky’s marital-debt analysis and was an abuse of discretion requiring reversal.


Rice v. Rice, 336 S.W.3d 66 (Ky. 2011)