Litigation

Wife Not Entitled to Periodic Support

A wife is not entitled to periodic support due to failure to prove freedom from fault in the dissolution of the marriage. Guillory v. Guillory, No. 08-1375, La. Ct. App., April 1, 2009.

The parties were married approximately 17 months before the husband moved out of the matrimonial domicile. The wife contended that the district court manifestly erred in finding her partially at fault in the dissolution of the marriage. The court gave great deference to the trial court's determinations. The wife failed to prove freedom from fault, as required for an award of final periodic support under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 112(A). The wife's behavior constituted habitual intemperance or excesses, cruel treatment, or outrages. She stayed away from home for days at a time, locked her husband out of their home when he was late, and purposely delayed a trip by angrily failing to prepare to leave as scheduled. The court was satisfied that the trial court's finding that the wife was not free from fault was not manifestly erroneous. The wife also failed to establish good cause for the extension of the interim periodic spousal support, pursuant to La. Civ. Code Ann. arts. 111, 113, because she failed to undertake a job search and was voluntarily out of the workforce. She did not establish any compelling reason that would make it inequitable to deny an extension of such support.

Estate of a Decedent Spouse May Be Entitled to Assert Equitable Claims

The estate of a decedent spouse may be entitled to assert equitable claims against the marital estate. Kay v. Kay, 405 N.J. Super. 278; 964 A.2d 324 (N.J. Super.Ct., 2009).

Defendant died during the pendency of an action for divorce, and the trial court denied the estate leave to substitute for defendant and file amended pleadings. The trial court stayed its order for three weeks to allow the estate to file pleadings in an equity court. On appeal, the estate contended that the trial court erred by relying on Kruzdlo v. Kruzdlo, 251 N.J. Super. 70, 73, 596 A.2d 1098 (Ch. Div. 1990), in which it was held that, unlike a surviving spouse, the estate of a decedent spouse is not entitled to assert equitable claims against the marital estate sounding in constructive trust, resulting trust, quasi-contract or unjust enrichment. The court concluded that the trial court should have accepted the pleadings and considered whether the equities stemming from the facts alleged called for relief from the strict legal effects of the defendant's death during the pendency of the divorce action. To the extent that Kruzdlo provided a contrary rule, the court disapproved it. The court reversed the judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The court noted that it was leaving to the trial court to determine whether the estate's claims should be addressed in the Family Part or transferred to another part or division of the Superior Court.

Wife Not Entitled to Periodic Support

A wife is not entitled to periodic support due to failure to prove freedom from fault in the dissolution of the marriage. Guillory v. Guillory, No. 08-1375, La. Ct. App., April 1, 2009.

The parties were married approximately 17 months before the husband moved out of the matrimonial domicile. The wife contended that the district court manifestly erred in finding her partially at fault in the dissolution of the marriage. The court gave great deference to the trial court's determinations. The wife failed to prove freedom from fault, as required for an award of final periodic support under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 112(A). The wife's behavior constituted habitual intemperance or excesses, cruel treatment, or outrages. She stayed away from home for days at a time, locked her husband out of their home when he was late, and purposely delayed a trip by angrily failing to prepare to leave as scheduled. The court was satisfied that the trial court's finding that the wife was not free from fault was not manifestly erroneous. The wife also failed to establish good cause for the extension of the interim periodic spousal support, pursuant to La. Civ. Code Ann. arts. 111, 113, because she failed to undertake a job search and was voluntarily out of the workforce. She did not establish any compelling reason that would make it inequitable to deny an extension of such support.

Estate of a Decedent Spouse May Be Entitled to Assert Equitable Claims

The estate of a decedent spouse may be entitled to assert equitable claims against the marital estate. Kay v. Kay , 405 N.J. Super. 278; 964 A.2d 324 (N.J. Super.Ct., 2009).

Defendant died during the pendency of an action for divorce, and the trial court denied the estate leave to substitute for defendant and file amended pleadings. The trial court stayed its order for three weeks to allow the estate to file pleadings in an equity court. On appeal, the estate contended that the trial court erred by relying on Kruzdlo v. Kruzdlo , 251 N.J. Super. 70, 73, 596 A.2d 1098 (Ch. Div. 1990), in which it was held that, unlike a surviving spouse, the estate of a decedent spouse is not entitled to assert equitable claims against the marital estate sounding in constructive trust, resulting trust, quasi-contract or unjust enrichment. The court concluded that the trial court should have accepted the pleadings and considered whether the equities stemming from the facts alleged called for relief from the strict legal effects of the defendant's death during the pendency of the divorce action. To the extent that Kruzdlo provided a contrary rule, the court disapproved it. The court reversed the judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The court noted that it was leaving to the trial court to determine whether the estate's claims should be addressed in the Family Part or transferred to another part or division of the Superior Court.