.webp)
.png)
Alimony (or “spousal maintenance”) comes in multiple distinct variations. One variation is known as “indefinite alimony,” which essentially means a payment structure which doesn’t have a fixed or set end date. In other words, the receiving spouse, or the “payee,” will continue to receive alimony payments on a permanent basis, unless compelling circumstances come up which support a motion to alter the award.
Naturally, readers may wonder: what circumstances might be sufficient to justify the alteration of indefinite alimony? The answer is that the circumstances must constitute a “material change” which justifies the alteration. There is no “bright line rule” which predetermines what circumstances will end up constituting a material change; everything is determined on a case-by-case basis, and so a Maryland judge will individually assess whether this hurdle has been met. In addition to material change, the alteration must also be needed to avoid a harsh or unfair result.
Indefinite alimony can either be reduced or terminated altogether. Again, everything depends on the specifics of the case. In a recent case, a former spouse was able to attain a termination of indefinite alimony after he transitioned into retirement. Let’s go over the facts and outcome of this case in detail.
Facts of the Case
The husband in this case eventually retired in 2021 at the age of 71. The divorce occurred in 2015, however, and the husband had been ordered to pay indefinite alimony. The monthly payments were $2,500 per month. Prior to retirement, the husband earned nearly $20,000 per month at a research firm, but post-retirement his income dropped by over 50%. The husband’s new monthly income (from Social Security and other accounts) was approximately $6,750.
The husband filed a motion to terminate his indefinite alimony obligation. He argued that his substantial drop in monthly income due to retirement constituted a material change in circumstances which was sufficient to justify the termination. He also cited the fact that the ex-wife had a higher income than he had (post-retirement); at the time of his motion to terminate, his wife had a monthly income of roughly $12,500.
Outcome & Discussion
The husband was successful at the trial court level and the wife was unsuccessful on appeal. The court concluded that the husband’s severe reduction in income was in fact sufficient to justify the termination. The wife tried to raise several arguments on appeal, including the fact that her income was only possible because she held multiple jobs after the divorce. The appellate division wouldn’t even consider her arguments, however, because she failed to raise them at the trial court at all. Appellate courts will often reject “newly devised” arguments which could have been raised at the trial court level.
This case demonstrates how indefinite alimony can be reduced or eliminated because of a change of circumstances. Of course, the outcome of any given set of facts always required a careful independent analysis, and so we cannot extrapolate the outcome of this case to other hypothetical situations. But this case gives us a good sense of the type of evidence required to support an alteration to an alimony obligation.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information
To learn more about indefinite alimony awards, reductions to alimony awards, or another related family law topic, contact one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.
.png)
