Dyke v. Scopetti

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed an order requiring a father to pay specified college-tuition costs for his daughters under a Pennsylvania divorce agreement. The court held that the agreement was enforceable and that the father's acceptance of the institutions could not be unreasonably withheld. It also upheld the trial court's reasonableness analysis concerning the daughters' college choices, tuition costs, scholarships, and the father's ability to pay.

Holdings

1. The agreement did not expressly require advance consultation, and the daughters' failure to consult father before enrolling did not by itself defeat his obligation to pay.
2. The phrase requiring attendance at an institution acceptable to father created an enforceable condition, but father could not withhold acceptance unreasonably.
3. The tuition provision was neither unenforceably indefinite nor illusory.
4. The magistrate did not abuse its discretion in finding father's refusal and proposed $10,000 annual cap unreasonable and in requiring him to pay the tuition, fees, room, and board remaining after scholarships and grants, subject to the stated adjustment for the daughter's transfer year.
5. In the absence of contractual guidance, scholarships and grants should first be applied to the daughters' non-tuition costs, with any remaining amount credited against father's tuition obligation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the phrase requiring the daughters to attend an institution acceptable to father created a condition precedent that allowed father to avoid all tuition obligations absent his approval.
2. Whether Pennsylvania law implies a reasonableness limitation on father's exercise of his discretion to accept or reject the daughters' college choices.
3. Whether the tuition provision was unenforceably indefinite or illusory.
4. Whether the magistrate abused its discretion in determining that the daughters' college choices and tuition expenses were reasonable.
5. Whether scholarships and grants should first be applied to the daughters' non-tuition costs before any excess was credited against father's tuition obligation.

Disposition

affirmed