Former Husband Appeals Judgment Of Indefinite Alimony And Attorney’s Fees

In the case of Koti v. Koti, the husband filed an appeal after the trial court ordered him to pay indefinite alimony and his wife’s attorney’s fees. The husband presented four issues for the appeals court’s consideration. Those include:

1. The trial court erred and abused its discretion as a matter of law when it determined that the appellant’s income “is more along a minimum of $85,000”, which was higher than the amount represented on the former husband’s tax return.
2. The trial court abused its discretion when it awarded the former wife indefinite alimony
3. The trial judge abused his discretion when deciding that the former wife was not capable of supporting herself.
4. The trial court abused its discretion when it awarded the former wife $10,000 in attorney’s fees.

The appeals court was asked to determine whether or not the circuit court erred when it granted the wife indefinite alimony in the amount of $2,000 per month and whether or not the circuit court erred when it ordered the husband to pay $10,000 in attorneys’ fees.

In this case, the appeals court neither affirmed or reversed the circuit court’s award of indefinite alimony, but rather remanded the case to the circuit court for further consideration of the husband’s income.

The appeal 

The former husband challenged the circuit court’s decision to grant his former wife alimony in the amount of $2,000 per month. He argued that the court erred in finding that his testimony about his finances was not credible and that it would be impossible to determine his actual annual income. He further argued that the court erred in rejecting the evidence he presented regarding his business income, deductions, and personal income, and imputing to him an annual income of $85,000. Further, the husband argued that the court erred when it determined that his wife could not functionally support herself. He also challenged the order to pay his wife’s attorney’s fees.

In making a determination for alimony, the court must consider all factors necessary for a fair and equitable award. This generally includes the financial need of the spouse receiving alimony and the paying spouse’s ability to pay. The court must make a determination as to whether or not a financially dependent spouse is capable of being self-supporting. An award of alimony is determined based on how much disposable income a paying spouse has after their expenses have been paid.

To award indefinite alimony, the court must find that:

1. Due to age, illness, infirmity, or disability, the party seeking alimony cannot reasonably be expected to make substantial progress toward becoming self-supporting; or
2. Even if the receiving party can make progress toward becoming self-sufficient, the respective standards of living between the parties would be “unconscionably” disparate.

In this case, the court determined that the wife had a need for indefinite alimony but that the husband’s income was not credibly calculated. The appeals court remanded the matter to the circuit court to establish what specifically the husband’s income was for the purpose of calculated indefinite alimony.

Talk to a Maryland Divorce Lawyer Today 

The Bel Air family lawyers at Schlaich & Thompson, Chartered represent the interests of divorcing couples. We can help you sort out key issues such as equitable distribution of the marital estate, alimony, child custody, and child support. Call today to learn more.

Source:

casetext.com/case/koti-v-koti?q=divorce%202023&jxs=md&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case&tab=keyword