Former Husband Contests Former Wife’s Alimony Award

Maryland Family Law Article § 11-106 lays out the statutory conditions under which an alimony award is made. The court must review several factors, such as the paying spouse’s ability to pay and the receiving spouse’s genuine need. The petitioner must argue that those statutory factors are present to receive an award of alimony. In the case of Masterson v. Masterson, the former husband contested his wife’s award of rehabilitative alimony. In this article, the Bel Air, MD, divorce lawyers will discuss the case and how it applies to Maryland law.

Background of the case 

In this case, the former husband and wife were married in 2008. The marriage ended in 2022 after the couple was married for 12 years. The wife, who was previously co-owner and financial manager of the husband’s roofing business, earned around $550 a month from part-time employment. She was pursuing real estate licensure. Meanwhile, the husband faced an upcoming surgical procedure but was financially capable of supporting himself while paying alimony to his wife.

At their divorce trial, the court granted the couple:

• An absolute divorce
• Division of marital assets
• Rehabilitative alimony for the wife ($2,500 per month for 24 months)
• Retroactive alimony for the wife ($2,500 per month for 18 months)
• Each party had to pay their own attorney fees

The husband appealed the alimony award, arguing:

• The court failed to provide a justification for the alimony award
• The inclusion of meal expenses in his income calculation was improper

The issues on appeal then became:

• Was the alimony award justified? Did the trial court abuse its discretion by failing to explain why the wife needed rehabilitative and retroactive alimony?
• Did the trial court improperly add the husband’s meal expenses to his income for the purposes of calculating alimony?

The appeal 

According to the appellate court, although the trial judge did not explicitly provide a justification, the factual findings, such as the wife’s limited income, debt burden, and need for time to become self-supporting, sufficiently demonstrate consideration for the Maryland alimony factors under Family Law § 11-106(b). The court noted that the statute does not require separate analysis for rehabilitative versus retroactive alimony. In addition, the appeals court found that the inclusion of meal expenses was appropriate. As a result, the appeals court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and the wife got her alimony. 

Talk to a Bel Air, MD, Divorce Lawyer Today 

Schlaich & Thompson, Chartered, represent the interests of Bel Air, MD, residents during their divorce. Call our Bel Air family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

courts.state.md.us/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions/1854s22.pdf