Strauss v. Strauss
27 A.3d 233
Pa. Super. Ct.2011Background
- Husband and Wife married on November 22, 2000; no children; both are similarly situated professionally.
- Decedent Howard Strauss died September 27, 2005, leaving a 2005 Will that reduced Husband's share of the residuary estate in favor of charities.
- Husband received $229,644 from the residuary estate under the 2005 Will; prior 1991 Will provided a larger share.
- Husband and Brother challenged the 2005 Will in New Jersey; a consent order was entered December 11, 2006, each receiving $150,000 thereafter.
- Divorce action filed December 19, 2007; the master found Will-contest proceeds were non-marital; the trial court later deemed them marital and ordered a division.
- A separate alimony pendente lite (APL) arrangement existed; Husband paid APL to Wife under a 550/month agreement; the court ultimately denied Husband a credit for those payments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Will-contest proceeds marital property? | Strauss contends proceeds are marital; route through estate funds qualifies for ED. | Strauss argues proceeds are non-marital inheritance from the residuary estate. | Proceedings non-marital; not subject to equitable distribution. |
| Is Husband entitled to a credit for APL payments? | Strauss seeks reimbursement for APL payments under prior support agreement. | Strauss argues court should grant credit due to agreement and financial disparity. | Credit denied; no reversal of court's discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Luongo, 823 A.2d 942 (Pa. Super. 2003) (contestant must prove entitlement to share if validity challenged)
- In re Haak's Estate, 18 A.2d 671 (Pa. 1941) (residuary clause dispositions to estate)
- Smith v. Smith, 904 A.2d 15 (Pa. Super. 2006) (standard for abuse of discretion in ED review)
- Busse v. Busse, 921 A.2d 1248 (Pa. Super. 2007) (APL award review factors; discretion)