Divorce Lawyers Indianapolis

 Neither party accused the other of dissipation, but the trial court sua sponte found dissipation by the husband in maintaining his separate residence, thus the husband was never given the opportunity to present “clear and specific” evidence that his expenditures for the residence were legitimate, and the trial court abused its discretion in finding dissipation sua sponte because the trial produced no clear evidence that the husband spent more than reasonable sums to maintain his home.  In re Hahin
 An irreconcilable breakdown period, for purposes of identifying dissipation, does not extend from the initial signs of trouble in a marriage.  In re Hazel
 The issue in determining whether a dissipation is shown is whether the party used marital property for his own benefit for a purpose unrelated to the marriage during a period when only that party had access to the funds.  In re Philips