Entries Tagged 'Spousal Support' ↓

Spousal Support for College

The circumstances under which a court can award, extend, or modify spousal support continue to shrink.

In In re Marriage of Serna (12/14/2000) 2000 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13193, the Fourth District Court of Appeals held that in a spousal support proceeding, a trial court may not consider the expenses incurred by a supported spouse for an adult child. In so doing, the appellate court expressly disapproved In re Marriage of Siegel (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 88, and In re Marriage of Paul (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 913, both of which had approved consideration of paying the expenses of adult children as an element of need in determining spousal support awards. Continue reading →

Spousal Support in Long-term Marriage

It has been said that in life nothing is certain other than death and taxes. In the family law trade, a third certainty can be added–paying spousal support after a long marriage.

In the recent case of In re Marriage of Schmir, 11/16/05, Div 7, B175397 the court delineated the proper way to terminate support after a long-term marriage. Continue reading →

New Mate Income

In the recent case of Romero v. Romero, [2002 DJDAR 7773, July 11,2002], the Fourth Appellate District has given the strongest statement to date regarding the application of Family Code Section 4323(b) with regards to a trial court’s ability to consider directly or indirectly a subsequent spouse’s or non-marital partner’s income in determining or modifying spousal support. Continue reading →

Spousal Support After Mandatory Retirement: All That Glitters is Not Gold

The last half of the ’90s have witnessed a dramatic rise in downsizing, enhanced early retirement programs, and voluntary early retirements for the sake of enjoying the “golden years.” Over the last 10 years, appellate courts have made it clear that a spousal support payor who chooses to take advantage of early retirement is still chargeable with imputed income, based on his or her earning capacity. Continue reading →

Cohabitation, the recent case of In re Marriage of Bower

It is common for family law attorneys to hear from clients who are paying spousal support that their ex-spouse is now living with someone and as a result they should not be obligated to continue to pay spousal support. The state legislature, in Family Code Section 4323, addresses the relationship between cohabitation and the need for spousal support. In the recent case of In re Marriage of Bower, (DJDAR 2547/343/4/2002) the reviewing court analyses what constitutes living together in the context of utilizing the presumptions found in Family Code Section 4323. Continue reading →

Spousal Support Termination Upon Remarriage

How does a practitioner negotiate and draft an order that provides for spousal support to continue beyond the remarriage of the supported spouse? What language, if any, is needed in the judgment to insure that the intentions of the parties are followed? Continue reading →

Enforcement of Pre-marital Agreement Waiver of Spousal Support

Will a spousal suport waiver contained in a premarital agreement be binding? Base on the landmark case of In re Marriage of Pendleton & Fireman (2000) 24 Cal.4th 39 and recent statutes, most attorneys would answer the question in the affirimative. However the answer is more complex as is reflected in the recent case of Marriage of Rosendale, June 28, 2004, 119 Cal. App. 4th 1202; 15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 137; Continue reading →

Spousal Support - All Things To All People

In light of the wide discretion afforded family law judicial officers, it is often said that a trial judge can find support for almost any position. The recent Fourth District decision In Re Marriage of Shaughnessy, 2006 DJDAR 6552, provides explanation for that contention.

Michelle and Greg were married November 1979 and separated in March 1995. The parties had no children. Greg filed for divorce in August 2000. Marital status was bifurcated pursuant to a Judgment of September 31, 2002, with the court reserving jurisdiction on the remaining issues, including spousal support. On April 24, 2003, the Court entered a partial Judgment on spousal support. Although Greg had been paying support since separation, the court ordered Greg to pay $2,000.00 per month. The court made detailed findings (14 paragraphs) in support of its order. Continue reading →

The Various “Steps” in the Alimony Dance

Step ups, step downs, phase ins, phase outs. These concepts are tools that family lawyers and judicial officers utilize to incrementally increase or decrease pendente lite or post judgment support orders. The rules regarding their applications however, are not the same, and in some instances the well intentioned application of such a concept may still give a rise to a reversal. Continue reading →

Contact Us for a consultation