Court of Appeals Case Review: The Kerslake Split—Boats, Debt, and Scaffolding Drama
By: Janee Patterson, A New Attorney with an Old Spirit and Spicy Attitude

In the Kerslake v. Kerslake saga, a Haywood County couple went from marital bliss to marital divide over everything from boats to, of all things, scaffolding. While courtroom dramas usually revolve around custody battles or fierce property fights, this case threw in a unique mix of foreclosures, post-separation debts, and, yes, marital property being distributed to adult children. Get comfy, folks, because this one’s a legal nailbiter. .

Love on the Rocks: Debt and Divorce

Let’s set the scene: Jason Forrest Kerslake (Husband) and Vickii Michelle Kerslake Todd (Wife) were married in 2016 and lasted three-and-a-half years before deciding that division, not multiplication, was their new marital math. With no children born from the marriage but adult kids from previous ones, they quickly found themselves fighting over everything from houses to a boat (cue the Titanic theme song).

Starting a marriage days after a divorce from another wife slightly indicates that we may be starting off after some hanky panky, but that is just a guess. The court had to untangle their financial mess, including the Red Maple Drive marital home and a 1.62-acre lot that came into their possession via foreclosure from Husband’s prior marriage with the first wife. Aren’t you already wondering what made her stop paying the mortgage? The situation was more tangled than last year’s Christmas lights. Throw in some hefty loans, unpaid debts, and a post-separation repair to the detached garage, and you’ve got yourself a prime-time legal drama.

Water Damage and Divisible Debt

After the date of separation, Wife continued to live in the home, but failed to stop water damage from happening, even after she knew about it. In the fine tradition of, “Who’s going to pay for this?” Wife argued that a post-separation loan to fix water damage in the marital garage shouldn’t have been classified as divisible debt. But here’s the kicker: since the house was marital property (you can’t just leave a leaky garage forever), the court decided the $18,215 loan to make repairs was necessary to prevent further damage. Like in a DIY nightmare, fixing something after separation still falls under the marital umbrella—even if the couple isn’t sharing that umbrella anymore.

The court upheld the debt as divisible because it was used to maintain a marital asset. Moral of the story? Whether you’re married or not, water damage isn’t going to wait for a court decision to be dealt with. Outcome – Wife had to help pay for the repairs even with Husband keeping the house.

Scaffolding and Separate Property Shenanigans

Perhaps the most surprising twist in this case was over scaffolding. Yes, scaffolding. Apparently, this isn’t just something you see at a construction site—it became a point of legal contention. Husband claimed it was his separate property, and rightfully so; he bought it before the marriage. And guess what? He was right! The court had erroneously lumped this $7,800 worth of scaffolding into the marital pot, but it turns out this was one piece of equipment Wife wasn’t entitled to climb.

A Boat and a Business Debt Sink Marital Bliss

Then there was the matter of Husband’s business debt, racked up via a judgment against his business on the day of separation. Talk about cutting it close! The court, perhaps thinking this was a marital mess, included this debt in the mix. But since the business was classified as separate property, that debt should’ve sunk with Husband, not Wife. The court ultimately reversed this decision, leaving Wife off the hook for Husband’s business woes.

The Kids Get the Cars: An Unconventional Gift

One quirky aspect of this case was the distribution of vehicles to the couple’s respective adult children. Husband testified that both parties used marital funds to buy the cars, but the kids took off with them (literally) before the couple separated. Wife argued the cars were marital property, but the court found that the vehicles had already been delivered to the children, making them gifts. When it comes to kids and cars, apparently, it’s better to give than to receive… unless you’re trying to hang onto the title. So basically the value of the vehicles belong to the children and not to Husband nor Wife.

Rent, Mortgage Payments, and a Very Unequal Split

The court also faced a fun puzzle: post-separation mortgage payments. Wife stayed in the marital home for a year after separating, paying the mortgage for part of the time and covering the taxes (and leaving the water to seep). Husband resumed paying after she left for vacation. The court gave Husband credit for keeping the mortgage afloat, but forgot to consider Wife’s tax payments. Now, it’s back to the trial court to figure out if she deserves a credit for that. Fingers crossed the next round of proceedings isn’t as leaky as the garage.

A “Distributive Award” Bonus: Wait, There’s More?!

Perhaps the final shocker was the distributive award, which the court ordered on top of giving Husband over 81% of the marital estate (ouch!). Wife wasn’t too happy about this, but the court found plenty of reasons to justify the imbalance. In short, Husband paid off debts, fixed the house, and made more post-separation payments than a parent buying back-to-school supplies.

Final Thoughts: Boats, Bills, and Better Marital Planning

This case has it all: post-separation mortgage payments, a boat, and the unexpected cameo of scaffolding. The moral? Divorce is messy, especially when it involves foreclosures with exes, adult kids getting cars, and separate scaffolding purchases. If you ever find yourself in a marital split, remember to get those pre-nups signed, attend to your garage leaks, and don’t forget—if you gift a car to your kid, it’s theirs, not your soon-to-be ex’s.

While the court affirmed most of the trial court’s decisions, a few key items—like that scaffolding and some improperly classified debts—are heading back for a redo. At least one thing is clear: in equitable distribution cases, you never know what surprises might pop up (or what scaffolding might come tumbling down).