.webp)
.png)
As we’ve discussed numerous times before, alimony can be one of the most contentious issues of the divorce process. In some ways, alimony is a bit of an antiquated concept, although most people agree that it still makes sense to have it in many situations. The concept originates from an era in which women were less commonly found in the workplace, especially on a full time basis. Hence, in that era, alimony typically made sense, almost as a rule, because a divorced woman needed at least rehabilitative alimony to remain financially healthy after the separation. Now, alimony is awarded less frequently, but again most people would argue that it still has a place in society.
In the case of Summers v. Harmel (2018), the court brought up the concept of “voluntary impoverishment” when one spouse failed to take steps to become self-supporting after the start of the divorce. Let’s take a look at how this concept can impact how alimony is awarded in Maryland.
Overview of the Case
The couple in this case were married for over a decade, and during the marriage there was a substantial income disparity between the husband and wife. The husband owned and operated a successful auto dealership in Bethesda, while the wife didn’t work during the marriage, although prior to the marriage she worked as a preschool teacher. The husband’s income was roughly $1.2 million per year during the marriage. When the marriage dissolved, the wife requested a lump sum monetary award, and permanent alimony. The trial court judge awarded the wife a substantial lump sum award (of $970,000), which the husband paid on time. However, the trial court judge denied the wife’s request for permanent alimony, and instead awarded her rehabilitative alimony of $5,000 per month for 60 months.
The trial court judge based his determination for rehabilitative alimony partly on the doctrine of voluntary impoverishment. The judge concluded that the wife had voluntarily impoverished herself by failing to actively seek employment since the beginning of the divorce process. The judge then “imputed” an income of $20,000, concluding that this was the amount she could reliably expect to earn based on her education and work history. The wife appealed this judgment.
Outcome & Discussion
The wife lost the appeal. However, although she lost the appeal, she didn’t lose as a result of the argument which was put forth by the husband. The husband argued that the wife had essentially waived her right to contest the trial judge’s findings regarding voluntary impoverishment or alimony duration due to the fact that she accepted the lump sum monetary award. However, this argument was rejected, as the appellate division that acceptance of that type of award doesn’t necessarily bar an appeal of recurring alimony. But, after reviewing the record, the appellate division also concluded that there was a sufficient basis to determine that the wife did in fact voluntarily impoverish herself because of her behavior. She had a college degree, teaching experience, and essentially nothing preventing her from seeking gainful employment after the start of the divorce.
What’s more, the court noted that permanent alimony is generally awarded only in exceptional circumstances, such as those in which one spouse is permanently disabled. There was nothing really exceptional on which to base permanent alimony in this case, and in fact there was clear evidence that the wife had failed to take the appropriate course of action with respect to employment. Given these factors, the appellate division ruled against the wife.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information
If you would like more information on alimony, or another family law topic, reach out to one of the attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-9311.
.png)
