When Can a Maryland Court Award Indefinite Alimony?

In most cases where a Maryland court decides to award spousal support (alimony), the judge will prefer rehabilitative alimony over indefinite alimony. Rehabilitative alimony means one spouse must pay support to the other for a limited period of time with the ultimate goal of the receiving spouse becoming self-supporting. In contrast, indefinite alimony continues until the death of either spouse or the remarriage of the receiving spouse.

The “Unconscionably Disparate” Standard

Indefinite alimony is only appropriate in cases where the court determines that either of the following conditions apply:

• Due to age, illness, infirmness, or disability, the receiving spouse cannot reasonably be expected to make substantial progress towards become self-supporting; or
• Even after the receiving spouse makes as much progress to self-support as can reasonably be expected, their standard of living compared to the other spouse would still be “unconscionably disparate.”

The Appellate Court of Maryland recently addressed a case involving the latter condition. In Rothell v. Rothell, a husband and wife married in 1995. At the time, the wife was a partner at a law firm while the husband was an active duty member of the United States Air Force. During the marriage, the husband resigned from the Air Force and later started his own business while the wife maintained her successful law practice. Ultimately, the husband closed his business and focused on maintaining various properties that the couple had purchased over the years.

In 2022, the wife filed for divorce. The husband counter-sued. The husband requested indefinite alimony, which the court granted. The court subsequently ordered the now former wife to pay her former husband $5,000 per month permanently. The former wife appealed.

The Appellate Court agreed with the former wife that the trial court failed to properly support its decision to award permanent alimony. First, the trial judge “failed to make a finding that [the former husband] was currently self-supporting.” The judge simply remarked he thought the former husband could find a minimum wage job and “work up from there because he is smart.” But as the Appellate Court observed, the judge “never predicted” when the former husband would become self-supporting, which was “essential” to compare the parties’ respective standards of living.

Second, the trial court failed to account for the former wife’s pending termination by her law firm. This was also important when it came to assessing the relative financial positions of each party. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the judge did not “make any findings regarding the projected post-divorce standards of living of the parties and whether they would be unconscionably disparate.” The mere fact that the former wife earned a higher income during the marriage was insufficient. The trial court needed to explain how the parties would actually experience an “unconscionably” different standard of living absent an award of permanent alimony.

Contact a La Plata Spousal Support Attorney Today

Alimony is not appropriate in every Maryland divorce case. It is meant to provide financial support in certain cases where one spouse needs help becoming self-supporting. If you need legal advice on this subject from a qualified La Plata spousal support attorney, contact Fanning Law today at 301-934-3620 to schedule a consultation. We serve clients in LaPlata, Waldorf, and Lexington Park.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2173277543772304006