Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed a dissolution decree awarding Jeanne Wiedel alimony of $2,500 per month for 10 years. The court held that the award was not unreasonable in amount or duration, considering the parties’ income, assets, marriage length, shared custody of their children, and Jeanne’s medical condition and expenses. The court also applied the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines’ basic subsistence limitation and concluded that the alimony and child support obligations did not presumptively constitute an abuse of discretion.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by awarding Jeanne $2,500 per month in alimony.
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by ordering alimony for a period of 10 years.
- Whether the alimony award reduced Mark's net monthly income below the basic subsistence limitation under the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines.
Holdings
- The district court did not abuse its discretion in setting alimony at $2,500 per month because the record supported Mark's ability to pay after accounting for child support and showed a substantial disparity in the parties' income, earning capacity, and economic circumstances.
- The record did not establish that the combined child-support and alimony obligations reduced Mark's net monthly income below the basic subsistence limitation.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by ordering Mark to pay alimony for 10 years.
Key quotations
“In reviewing an alimony award, an appellate court does not determine whether it would have awarded the same amount of alimony as did the trial court, but whether the trial court’s award is untenable such as to deprive a party of a substantial right or just result.” (300 Neb. at 21)
“And an alimony award which drives the obligor’s net monthly income below the basic subsistence limitation set forth in the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines is presumptively an abuse of discretion unless the court specifically finds that conformity with the basic subsistence limitation would work an “‘unjust or inappropriate’” result in that case.” (300 Neb. at 22)
“Alimony is not a tool to equalize the parties’ income, but a disparity of income or potential income might partially justify an alimony award.” (300 Neb. at 24)
“Above all else, the duration of an alimony award must be reasonable.” (300 Neb. at 24)
Factual background
Mark and Jeanne Wiedel were married in 2000, separated in 2014, and divorced in 2017. They had three children and operated under a joint legal and physical custody arrangement with week-on-week-off parenting time. Mark was a self-employed farmer with substantially greater income and earning potential, while Jeanne earned approximately $30,000 annually, had rheumatoid arthritis and significant medication costs, and had limited retirement assets. Their property settlement awarded Mark the marital home, extensive farmland and farming-related assets, and required him to pay Jeanne a $265,000 equity adjustment; the district court also ordered Mark to pay $2,500 per month in alimony for 10 years.
Procedural history
The Thayer County District Court entered a decree dissolving the parties' marriage, approving their property settlement agreement and joint custody plan, ordering Mark to pay child support of $876 per month, and awarding Jeanne alimony of $2,500 per month for 10 years. Mark filed a motion for new trial or to alter or amend the judgment, challenging only the alimony award; the motion was overruled, and he timely appealed. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed after finding no abuse of discretion.