Jones v. Jones

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed in part and remanded a Family Court alimony order in a divorce proceeding. The court held that the wife’s prior cohabitation did not bar her from receiving alimony because she was not receiving alimony during the cohabitation and had ended the relationship before the alimony hearing without attempting to deceive the court. The court remanded for further findings regarding the reasonableness of the wife’s claimed medical and health insurance expenses.

Holdings

1. A spouse is not disqualified from receiving alimony under 13 Del. C. § 1512(g) merely because the spouse cohabitated before becoming an alimony recipient, where the cohabitation ended before the alimony award and was not terminated as part of an attempt to deceive the court.
2. The Family Court was required to explain how it determined that Wife's claimed monthly medical expenses of $300 and health-insurance expenses of $715 were reasonable, or to determine their reasonableness on an expanded record.
3. The Family Court did not err in finding that Wife had maximized her earnings.
4. The Family Court's award of alimony for eight years, six months, and seven days was permissible because it did not exceed 50 percent of the parties' seventeen-year marriage and was supported by the record.
5. The Family Court did not err in treating the education-contribution factor as irrelevant because neither party alleged that one contributed to the other's education or training, although the court properly considered Wife's degree in evaluating her earnings.
6. The Family Court did not err in averaging Husband's historical and projected earnings to determine his ability to pay alimony.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wife's prior cohabitation with another adult barred her from receiving alimony under 13 Del. C. § 1512(g).
2. Whether the Family Court adequately supported its determination that Wife's claimed medical and health-insurance expenses were reasonable for purposes of calculating alimony.
3. Whether the Family Court erred in finding that Wife had maximized her earnings despite her education, employment, and child-care responsibilities.
4. Whether the duration of the alimony award complied with 13 Del. C. § 1512(d).
5. Whether the Family Court properly treated Wife's bachelor's degree as irrelevant under the statutory factor concerning contributions to education or earning capacity.
6. Whether the Family Court properly averaged Husband's historical and projected earnings in determining his ability to pay alimony.

Disposition

remanded