Mayle v. Mayle
229 W. Va. 179
| W. Va. | 2012Background
- Petitioner Mayle appeals from family court spousal support award granting $5,500/month permanent for 10 years plus $1,500/month rehabilitative for 6 months; later reduced to $1,500/month after 10 years and denial of attorney fees.
- Respondent Mayle earned over $300,000/year; petitioner stayed home and supported family, later unemployed.
- Parties separated in 2007; during separation respondent provided ongoing support and commingled finances; assets included real estate, investments, and retirement accounts.
- Family court found fault modestly against respondent and awarded an offset in equitable distribution favoring petitioner.
- Court ordered reduction after ten years based on conjecture about petitioner’s future employment and relocation; reduction deemed unsupported by evidence.
- Circuit Court affirmed (with respect to spousal support) and also denied attorney fees; this Court reverses in part and remands for fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ten-year reduction of spousal support was proper | Mayle argues reduction lacks evidentiary support | Mayle contends reduction follows ten-year rule and is discretionary | Reduction improper; no evidence supports preemptive decrease |
| Whether attorney fees should have been awarded | Mayle requests $20,000+ costs due to disparity | Mayle cites lack of bad faith and balanced costs; fees denied | Remand for attorney fees and costs; existing denial constitutes abuse of discretion |
| Whether the awarded spousal support amounts and structure were properly determined | Mayle contends $12,000/mo needed; high disparity justifies award | Court properly considered 20 statutory factors and deference applied | Award upheld for $5,500/mo permanent for 10 years and $1,500/mo rehabilitative for 6 months; but ten-year reduction reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Banker v. Banker, 196 W.Va. 535 (1996) (attorney’s fees require considering fault, financials, reasonableness; abuse of discretion remand)
- Sellitti v. Sellitti, 192 W.Va. 546 (1994) (alimony decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion; deference to lower courts)
- Nichols v. Nichols, 160 W.Va. 514 (1977) (discretion in alimony not to be disturbed absent abuse)
- Lambert v. Miller, 178 W.Va. 224 (1987) (discretion standard in alimony)
- Whittaker v. Whittaker, 180 W.Va. 57 (1988) (discretionary review of alimony in context of 20 factors)
- Pearson v. Pearson, 200 W.Va. 139 (1997) (factors for determining attorney’s fees in divorce actions)
- Wachter v. Wachter, 216 W.Va. 489 (2004) (definition of de facto marriage used in spousal support context)