S.K.P. v. K.M.P.
1007 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 20, 2017Background
- Parties divorced after a 1992 marriage; they executed a March 25, 2009 Agreement for Order of Support ("2009 Support Agreement"), which the Domestic Relations Office converted into a Final Order of Support in June 2009.
- The 2009 Support Agreement required Husband to pay $2,300/month child support and, when each child reached 18 or graduated, to reduce Wife’s support by $767/month and deposit $767/month into an account in the child’s name for that child’s sole use (post-secondary support).
- The parties also executed a Second Addendum to a Property Settlement Agreement (PSA) providing Wife a 65% share of Husband’s marital deferred-compensation contributions and 65% of post-separation appreciation, payable on distribution.
- Oldest child B.P. graduated high school June 2011 and attended college for the 2011–2012 year; Wife paid tuition and later sought reimbursement from Husband for his alleged failure to pay post-secondary support as required by the 2009 Support Agreement.
- Wife filed petitions for special relief, contempt, and enforcement; the trial court ordered Husband to pay Wife $81,604.63 as her net 65% share of post-separation growth of the deferred-compensation plan (after a 10% tax reimbursement offset) and ordered Husband to reimburse Wife $14,254 for B.P.’s 2011–2012 tuition.
- Husband appealed, arguing (1) the 2009 Support Agreement’s post-secondary provision was unenforceable, (2) the reimbursement amount was incorrect, and (3) the tax allocation of the deferred-compensation distribution was improper.
Issues
| Issue | Husband's Argument | Wife's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of 2009 Support Agreement post-secondary provision | The Agreement was superseded/fulfilled by the June 2009 Final Order and is not separately enforceable; only a final post-nuptial property agreement can bind on post-secondary support | The Agreement is a valid contract enforceable alongside a court order; parents may contractually obligate post-secondary support | Court: Agreement enforceable; private support agreements coexist with support orders and are enforceable in contract or contempt actions |
| Scope of post-secondary obligation / amount owed for 2011–2012 tuition | Agreement only required $767/month deposit for child’s exclusive use (max $9,204/year); trial court erred ordering $14,254 reimbursement | Wife enforced the Agreement and sought reimbursement for tuition she paid; trial court awarded full tuition paid | Court: Husband breached and Wife may recover, but trial court erred in awarding $14,254; remanded to quantify Husband’s actual unpaid share not to exceed $9,204 |
| Tax allocation on deferred-compensation distribution (65% to Wife) | Parties mistakenly believed funds could be split pre-distribution; court should reform/adjust Addendum or allocate taxes to reflect actual tax consequences; 10% assumed tax was too low | Trial court allocated a 10% tax burden against Wife’s share of the growth portion; Wife received 65% net after a 10% offset | Court: Issue waived due to incomplete record (PSA, addenda, tax returns absent); appellate court declined to review and affirmed tax allocation decision in part |
| Remedy mechanism for enforcing support obligation | Husband: obligations satisfied once order entered; no separate contract enforcement | Wife: may enforce via contempt, contract action, or equity; 23 Pa.C.S.A. §3105 allows enforcement of agreements | Court: Enforcement via contempt and contract principles appropriate; domestic relations courts have plenary powers to enforce such agreements |
Key Cases Cited
- Nicholson v. Combs, 703 A.2d 407 (Pa. 1997) (private support agreements may be enforced separately from court orders)
- Sams v. Sams, 808 A.2d 206 (Pa. Super. 2002) (support agreements and orders may coexist; agreements enforceable under contract principles)
- Reif v. Reif, 626 A.2d 169 (Pa. Super. 1993) (post-secondary support can arise contractually in a post-nuptial agreement)
- Blue v. Blue, 616 A.2d 628 (Pa. 1992) (no legal duty to support children beyond majority absent agreement)
- W.A.M. v. S.P.C., 95 A.3d 349 (Pa. Super. 2014) (parties can contractually assume duty to support a child's post-secondary education)
- Kraisinger v. Kraisinger, 928 A.2d 333 (Pa. Super. 2007) (contract interpretation is a question of law; appellate review is plenary)