Azaltovic, J., Jr. v. Hedges, A.
2090 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 11, 2017Background
- Amy Hedges (Mother) and John Azaltovic (Father) divorced in 2013; their Separation Agreement (11/9/11) was incorporated but not merged into the divorce decree.
- The parties share legal custody; Mother has primary physical custody of two minor children.
- Paragraphs 15–16 of the Separation Agreement waived spousal support unless Mother filed for child support; if she did, Father would receive a $910/month credit against any child support she received for two years.
- In June 2016 a Virginia court ordered Father to pay Mother $1,043/month child support for the children; Mother sought and obtained that support in Virginia.
- Father filed a petition in Pennsylvania to enforce the Separation Agreement and collect $910/month from Mother pursuant to Paragraphs 15–16; the trial court ordered Mother to pay $910/month for two years.
- Mother appealed, arguing Paragraphs 15–16 violate public policy by effectively indemnifying Father for child support and undermining the children’s right to adequate support.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hedges) | Defendant's Argument (Azaltovic) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Paragraphs 15–16 of the Separation Agreement are void as against public policy | The provisions unlawfully penalize Mother for pursuing child support and contract away the children’s right to adequate support | The Agreement is a valid private contract; Father is entitled to the agreed $910/month credit against Mother’s child support | The provisions are void as against Pennsylvania public policy; trial court order enforcing them vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- Miesen v. Frank, 522 A.2d 85 (Pa. Super. 1987) (separation agreement clause indemnifying one parent for child support payments void as against public policy)
- Nessa v. Nessa, 581 A.2d 674 (Pa. Super. 1990) (separation agreements incorporated but not merged remain contracts enforceable as such)
- Stamerro v. Stamerro, 889 A.2d 1251 (Pa. Super. 2005) (standard of review: contract interpretation is question of law; marital settlement agreements generally enforceable)
- Ferguson v. McKiernan, 940 A.2d 1236 (Pa.) (public policy invalidation of contracts requires clear, dominant public policy demonstrated by law or precedent)