Sunday, October 4, 2015

Spousal Maintenance in Minnesota - Family-In-Law

Michael Boulette writes about current cases before the Minnesota Supreme Court that that may affect spousal maintenance (alimony) in Minnesota on his Family-In-Law blog.

The first upcoming case is Curtis v. Curtis, in which the former wife is arguing that she should be able to keep the $2.2+ in monies she received as part of the settlement in low-risk, low-income investments and her husband should make up the difference to account for the 7% in return she had planned to make from them.

The interesting part, however, is not the battle over the return rate for the investments but, as Mr. Boutelle points out, whether the Court will use this case to review why spousal support is awarded at all.

The part that really gets me in the whole matter is that in the Curtis vs. Curtis case there appears to be little doubt that the wife was the primary parent who raised the children and the issue over what the return rate should be is at least a fair question. It doesn't seem like a it is a good case to overturn spousal maintenance. My case would make a far better challenge as to the appropriateness and fairness of spousal support. After all, in my case:

  • The custody evaluator ruled that Spring was not the primary parent during the marriage.
  • The vocational assessment showed that Spring could make just as much money as me. 
  • Spring received some assets, for example part of my pension, that were earned pre-marriage. 
  • There is good evidence Spring committed perjury.
  • There is absolute evidence Spring and her lawyer Nelly Wince committed serious fraud. 
  • Spring repeatedly broke Court orders. 
  • Spring failed to reply to my attempts to negotiate spousal support within the Court mandated time-frame. 
  • On top of Spring receiving a huge amount of assets at the time of the divorce, she also received a massive amount of spousal support that by Court order will go on until I die. I have little hope of ever retiring or being able to remarry as that would make my new wife liable for spousal support to Spring should I become disabled. You would be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks this is not outrageous. 
I wish I could figure out a way to get my case to the Supreme Court but reality is that without funds, large funds, it is nearly impossible to even get a case heard.  

1 comment:

  1. I think you are grasping at straws with this one. Also, who was the primary parent does not matter --in Ohio anyway. My ex only took 3 months off from work after our only child was born. I was the primary parent, she was a hateful mother, and our son cut off all contact with his mother and refuses to speak with her or be in the same room with her. Nonetheless I have to pay my ex-wife lifelong alimony of half my net pay plus 100% of her legal costs for 4+ years of litigation.