Farwell v. Farwell
Child support ordered reversed because list of living expenses included wife’s personal expenses. Alimony cannot be awarded to the wife in the guise of child support.
Child support ordered reversed because list of living expenses included wife’s personal expenses. Alimony cannot be awarded to the wife in the guise of child support.
Commingling in budget of moneys required for wife’s support with support for the children is not appropriate, for it confuses support for the spouse with support for the children. Alimony for a divorced wife cannot be secured under an order only for support of the children.
The rule is that alimony and child support are two different categories of support which should not be intermingled by the trial court.
Trial court properly exercised its discretion in not applying guidelines in modification hearing where the support ordered was sufficient to support the children and any additional amount would have been maintenance in the guise of support.
Trial court properly deviated from guidelines where it found, among other things, that such a high award would constitute hidden maintenance.
Obligation for maintenance terminates either upon the death of the wife or upon the death of the husband.
Obligation for maintenance terminates either upon the death of the wife or upon the death of the husband.
No abuse of discretion in providing for limited term alimony. Limited period alimony is a two-edge sword. Both parties know the amount and the duration of the payments. The certainty allows the parties to make plans.
Five years limited term maintenance affirmed; court allowed to use testimony of vocational expert; limited term maintenance can be used to provide spouse with incentive to become self-supporting, to limit responsibility of payor-spouse and avoiding future litigation.
Four years maintenance in marriage of 28 years is reversed – statement by trial court that wife will not need maintenance after four years is inadequate under current law.