Smith v. Smith
2016 Ark. App. 571
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Don and Gretchen Smith married in 1976 and separated in April 2015; divorce decree entered December 9, 2015.
- Don (appellant) receives Social Security disability benefits (~$1,115 net/mo) and has multiple serious health issues; he sought alimony, asserting monthly expenses exceed income by ~$700 and that he will incur additional medical insurance and medication costs post-divorce.
- Gretchen (appellee), age 58, earns more than Don (take-home ~$1,206–$1,400 biweekly), currently lives with her mother but plans to move out and anticipates monthly expenses of ~$2,669.
- The trial court divided assets: awarded Don the marital home (debt-free) and some personal property; awarded Gretchen her ArkBest 401(k) (approx. $196,863) and her pension was divided equally; boat sale and savings previously split.
- Trial court considered health, income, assets, and earning capacity and denied Don’s request for alimony, concluding Gretchen lacked ability to pay once she moved out and Don had some ability to earn additional income.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Don) | Defendant's Argument (Gretchen) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by denying alimony | Don claimed a demonstrated need (expenses > income, impending medical costs) and Gretchen has ability to pay | Gretchen argued her income and living situation leave her unable to pay after moving out; assets and income division were relatively equal | Denial affirmed; court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Kuchmas v. Kuchmas, 368 Ark. 43, 243 S.W.3d 270 (2006) (purpose of alimony is to address economic imbalances)
- Gilliam v. Gilliam, 2010 Ark. App. 137, 374 S.W.3d 108 (primary alimony factors: need and ability to pay)
- Johnson v. Cotton-Johnson, 88 Ark. App. 67, 194 S.W.3d 806 (additional factors: standard of living, earning capacity, resources, length of marriage)
- Valetutti v. Valetutti, 95 Ark. App. 83, 234 S.W.3d 338 (no fixed mathematical formula for alimony)
- Cole v. Cole, 89 Ark. App. 134, 201 S.W.3d 21 (alimony decision reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Foster v. Foster, 2015 Ark. App. 530, 472 S.W.3d 151 (definition of abuse of discretion)
- Mearns v. Mearns, 58 Ark. App. 42, 946 S.W.2d 188 (reversal of alimony denial where spouse was unemployed, had health problems, and other spouse had secure income)