Chambers v. Chambers
2017 Ark. App. 429
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Allan and Amy Chambers married in 2010, separated in 2015; no children of the marriage. Allan was the primary earner during the marriage.
- At a September 1, 2015 temporary hearing, the parties agreed (and the court entered an Agreed Temporary Order) that Allan would pay $700/month temporary spousal support, allocate temporary possession of specific personal property, and allocate certain debts; the order required the parties to exchange affidavits of financial means.
- Allan paid one month, then failed to make further temporary-support payments, failed to pay certain property taxes, and removed items from property; the court found him in contempt and he later paid the arrearages.
- Allan’s employment income dropped after a recession; he was laid off in December 2015, collected unemployment, and by trial had new lower-wage employment. He moved to modify the temporary-support obligation.
- At the final hearing the circuit court (1) ruled the temporary $700 spousal-support agreement could not be modified, (2) made an unequal property division (awarding the camper to Amy and ordering sale of boat and mower with proceeds applied to Amy’s judgment), and (3) awarded Amy $5,336.18 in attorney’s fees. Allan appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Amy) | Defendant's Argument (Allan) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the temporary $700 spousal-support agreement is modifiable | The agreed temporary support was an independent contract and not subject to modification | The $700 agreement was a temporary stipulation merged into the court’s order and is modifiable upon changed circumstances | Reversed — court held the temporary agreement was not an independent contract and is modifiable upon a proper showing of changed circumstances; remanded for proceedings on modification |
| Whether the property distribution (including offset for home debt reduction vs. camper) was proper | Distribution and offsets were equitable as implemented (camper awarded to Amy to satisfy her interest) | Distribution was disproportionate and court failed to state statutory reasons for unequal division | Reversed and remanded — circuit court failed to memorialize findings/reasons required by Ark. Code § 9-12-315 for unequal division; remand to enter compliant findings/order |
| Whether attorney’s fees awarded to Amy were appropriate | Amy, as the lower-earning spouse and primary recipient of arrearage judgment, was entitled to fees | Allan argued fees were excessive given his reduced income and that equities suggested each pay own fees | Reversed and remanded — fee award vacated for reconsideration after resolution of support/property issues |
| Enforcement of temporary-order arrearages and contempt | Amy sought enforcement and attorney’s fees for contempt for nonpayment and taking property | Allan contested some sanctions and later paid arrearages; he also raised defense of unclean hands on modification | Contempt findings and judgment for arrearages remain part of record; remand ordered for related modification and property/support adjustments as necessary |
Key Cases Cited
- Bracken v. Bracken, 302 Ark. 103 (Ark. 1990) (alimony awards generally subject to modification)
- Lively v. Lively, 222 Ark. 501 (Ark. 1953) (distinguishing independent contract supporting nonmodifiable support from stipulations merged into decree)
- Law v. Law, 248 Ark. 894 (Ark. 1971) (burden on party claiming an independent contract to prove it exists; stipulations not shown to be independent contract are modifiable)
- Boyles v. Boyles, 268 Ark. 120 (Ark. 1980) (modification of alimony requires showing change in circumstances; burden on mover)
- Moore v. Moore, 2016 Ark. 105 (Ark. 2016) (property division and interplay with alimony; discussed by trial court in this case)