Levy v. Levy
2014 Ohio 2650
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Jonee Farrell and Glenn Levy divorced in 2007 after a 30-year marriage; divorce decree awarded Jonee transfers of retirement assets, tuition payments, and $4,000/month spousal support for 160 months (reduced to $3,750/month if Glenn remained unemployed on 1/1/2008).\
- At divorce Glenn had substantial severance and higher income; Jonee had been a homemaker and was completing training to become a dental hygienist.\
- Glenn reduced spousal support to $2,000/month in January 2010 (he later said he sent a letter; Jonee denies agreeing). Jonee did not immediately contest the reduction.\
- Glenn filed to modify support downward in 2012; the magistrate reduced support to $1,375/month, found $56,250 in arrears, and ordered $275/month toward arrears; the court adopted that decision.\
- On appeal, the court reviewed jurisdiction to modify, the propriety of the reduction, contempt and attorney-fee rulings, and the arrearage repayment schedule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Farrell) | Defendant's Argument (Levy) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to modify spousal support | No substantial, unanticipated change occurred; court lacked jurisdiction | Decree reserved jurisdiction; Glenn’s income fell substantially and that change was not contemplated | Court: jurisdiction existed (decree reserved power; Glenn’s income drop was substantial and not contemplated) |
| Proper amount of modified spousal support | Reduction to $1,375 is too low; original intent/needs not met; at minimum $3,750 should apply | Income drop and Jonee’s earnings support a downward modification (Glenn proposed $2,000) | Court: $1,375 was an abuse of discretion; modified amount set to $3,750/month and remanded for correction |
| Contempt for failure to pay ordered support | Glenn’s unilateral 50% cut was disobedience and warrants contempt | Glenn substantially complied and made good‑faith payments given drastic income decline | Court: declined to find contempt (no abuse of discretion), so contempt finding denied on appeal |
| Arrearage repayment schedule | $275/month is too small and gives Glenn excessive time to repay | Glenn’s finances justify lower monthly arrear payment | Court: because support was raised to $3,750, arrearage payments must conform to statute; set at 20% of current support = $750/month and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Mandelbaum v. Mandelbaum, 121 Ohio St.3d 433 (Ohio 2009) (test for jurisdiction to modify spousal support requires express reservation plus substantial change not contemplated at divorce)
- Kunkle v. Kunkle, 51 Ohio St.3d 64 (Ohio 1990) (trial court has broad discretion in spousal‑support determinations)