In Re Marriage of Parrett v. Parrett
“Good fortune and highly elevated income” are factors the court can consider in determining maintenance. LaRocque fairness objective applies to a short marriage.
“Good fortune and highly elevated income” are factors the court can consider in determining maintenance. LaRocque fairness objective applies to a short marriage.
(1) LaRocque mandates an approach, not a result. (2) Reduction of income available for maintenance to pay business expenses was reasonable. (3) Although it is not recommended, offset of child support against maintenance is affirmed.
Multiple issues. See full summary.
Maintenance is not required in every long term marriage where there is disparate income. Here, wife did not increase her husband’s earning capacity or sacrifice her own.
Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it found that wife’s future income would be reasonably comparable to her standard of living during the marriage. Trial court need not guarantee the same standard.
Trial court did not fully consider statutory factors when it did not mention wife’s ability to become self-supporting in the future. Failure to consider wife’s earning capacity was a misuse of discretion.
No error in $300 per month for 24 months maintenance award for mid-life marriage lasting relatively short time (8 years).
Contribution to child care and economic support to family represents only what a spouse is legally and morally obligated to provide: it is not a vehicle by which a party receives a “refund” for such services.
Contribution to child care and economic support to family represents only what a spouse is legally and morally obligated to provide: it is not a vehicle by which a party receives a “refund” for such services.
60-40 split of income affirmed where trial court found wife was capable of obtaining a full-time position.