Kelley v Kelley [2016] GUSC 23 (12 August 2016)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

ALLYN KELLEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

MARK S. KELLEY,
Defendant-Appellee.

Supreme Court Case No.: CVA15-019

Superior Court Case No.: DM0488-10

OPINION

Filed: August 12, 2016

Cite as: 2016 Guam 23

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted on February 12, 2016
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellant: Daniel S. Somerfleck, Esq. Somerfleck & Associates, PLLC Nelson Bldg. 866 Rte. 7, Ste. 102 Maina, GU 96932

Appearing for Defendant-Appellee: Mark. S. Kelley, Pro Se 145B Chalan Iba Yigo, GU 96929

BEFORE: ROBERT J. TORRES, Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Associate Justice.

CARBULLIDO, J.:
[1] Plaintiff-Appellant Allyn Kelley (“Allyn”) appeals from the July 2, 2015, decision and order of the trial court in the underlying divorce action, relative to the division of the military retirement benefits of herself and of Defendant-Appellee Mark S. Kelley (“Mark”). Without reaching the merits of Allyn’s arguments or the trial court’s reasoning, we affirm, but on procedural grounds as explained herein.

1. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[2] Allyn appeals the trial court’s July 2, 2015, decision and order in the underlying divorce action, denying her motion to amend, and effectively affirming its earlier decision to amend the final decree of divorce relative to the division of the parties’ military retirement benefits. On March 1, 2013, the trial court entered its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Final Decree of Divorce, which included an equitable distribution of each party’s military retirement accumulated during the marriage, using the “time rule” – years of work performed during the marriage divided by years of work total. Record on Appeal (“RA”), tab 56 at 4-5 (Finds. Fact & Concl. Law, Mar. 1, 2013); see Hart v. Hart, 2008 Guam 11