Smith v. Smith

FRYE, Justice.

In this appeal based solely on the issue raised by the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, defendant contends that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that it was not essential for the trial court to characterize as active or passive the increase in the post-separation value of marital assets in this equitable distribution case. We agree. Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the Court of Appeals’ decision and remand for further proceedings.

The circumstances giving rise to this case are as follows: Plaintiff and defendant were married on 6 June 1972, separated 24…