Sue Ann Arnall, the ex-wife of Oklahoma oil executive Harold Hamm, lost an appeal of the couple's divorce case because she had cashed a check worth nearly $1 billion, the state Supreme Court said on Tuesday.
In a 7-2 decision, the court ruled in favor of a motion filed in January by Hamm, chief executive officer of oil company Continental Resources Inc, to dismiss Arnall's appeal. Earlier that month, Arnall had cashed Hamm's check for $975 million, the vast majority of the lower court's award in the case.
The majority of the justices said Arnall also took possession of the marital property awarded to her. Those actions, the court ruled, caused her to forfeit her right to appeal the judgment.
Sue Ann Arnall, the ex-wife of Oklahoma oil executive Harold Hamm, lost an appeal of the couple's divorce case because she had cashed a check worth nearly $1 billion, the state Supreme Court said on Tuesday
Unhappy: Arnall made it clear from the start she believed the marital wealth she was entitled to had been grossly undervalued
In January, Hamm also appealed the lower court decision, saying the judgment was excessive. In its ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court allowed his appeal to proceed despite dismissing Arnall's.
Craig Box, a lawyer for Hamm, said he had not read the opinion yet.
Last November, an Oklahoma district court ordered Hamm to pay his ex-wife about $1 billion in cash and assets when the couple divorced after a 26-year marriage. The check for $975 million that Arnall cashed represented the entire balance owed by Hamm, according to the court's decision.
But Arnall said the earlier ruling allowed Hamm to keep the vast majority of a marital estate worth up to $18 billion. She had sought an award of billions more.
The Hamm case began in 2012 and concluded after a 2-1/2 month trial last November. The judgment was among the largest ever in a U.S. divorce.
In a separate but concurring opinion, two justices wrote that they viewed the majority's decision to allow Hamm's appeal to continue as 'fundamentally unfair.'
In a dissenting opinion, two other justices wrote that barring Arnall from appealing because she accepted the $1 billion judgment was a 'draconian approach.'
Arnall made it clear from the start she believed the marital wealth she was entitled to had been grossly undervalued.
The only spouse to ever score a bigger settlement in the United States was Jocelyn Wildenstein, who reportedly received $2.5billion after splitting with her businessman and art dealer husband Alec in 1999.
The majority of the justices said Tuesday that Arnall also took possession of the marital property awarded to her. Those actions, the court ruled, caused her to forfeit her right to appeal the judgment
In January, Hamm also appealed the lower court decision, saying the judgment was excessive. In its ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court allowed his appeal to proceed despite dismissing Arnall's
During the trial it was argued that Continental’s growth stemmed mostly from passive factors, such as rising oil prices, and, under Oklahoma law, only the 'active' portion of wealth accrued during marriage in previously acquired assets is subject to division.
Miss Arnall’s lawyers contend however that Judge Haralson miscalculated what was due to her by attributing only a small portion of a $14billion rise in the value of Mr. Hamm's Continental shares during the marriage - 6 percent.
RELATED ARTICLES
- Previous
- 1
- Next
- Rosie O'Donnell's estranged wife files for sole custody of... Divorce DOES affect teenagers: Those who live through a...
Share this article
Share
Miss Arnall, who worked as a lawyer for Continental when she and Mr. Hamm married, and went on to take a series of executive roles at the company, also claims that Judge Haralson undervalued her own contributions to the couple’s wealth.
Most estimates have stated that Continental Resources was worth around $50million in 1988 when the couple married, which is just a drop in the well when compared to the $20billion behemoth it is today. A behemoth that Mr. Hamm has a 68 percent stake in, a stake he lost none of in the divorce as it was determined to be 'separate property.'
Married 26 years: In a dissenting opinion, two other justices wrote that barring Arnall from appealing because she accepted the $1 billion judgment was a 'draconian approach'
