After dissolution of marriage proceeding, Wife appealed on four issues. The Court of Appeals begins with a lengthy discussion of substantial compliance because Wife failed to follow the Civil Rules.
First, Wife argues that “the visitation schedule is improper and should be set aside.” As she did not advance a substantive argument on this issue, the Court of Appeals does not address it pursuant to its holding in Milby v. Mears, 580 S.W.2d 724, 727 (Ky. App. 1979).
Second, Wife argues that the family court erred in classifying three parcels of real estate as nonmarital.
Third, Wife argues that the family court’s division of personal property was inequitable. Again the Court of Appeals does not address these issues this time because Wife failed to preserve them for appeal and failed to cite underlying authority.
Fourth, Wife argues that “the trial court erred in awarding [Husband] a nonmarital interest in another parcel of real estate.” The Court of Appeals briefly addresses this issue affirming the family court holding adequate tracing was admitted into evidence.
Digested by Elizabeth M. Howell
