Supportive Relationship Can Impact Alimony

The main purpose of alimony is to provide support for a former spouse as close to the marital standard of living as reasonable. After determining the standard of living during the marriage, the judge goes through an analysis of need of one and ability to pay of the other spouse. Since alimony is based on continuing the standard of living during the marriage, the purpose for alimony ends with the death of either party just as it would if they stayed married. Since remarriage terminates the relationship, alimony also ends with remarriage of the recipient.

An alimony award is not generally set in stone and may be modified when there is a substantial, material, involuntary change in circumstances not contemplated at the time the divorce judgment was entered. Change in circumstances can warrant increase or decrease in alimony. It is up to the judge to decide if the change is substantial, material, involuntary and that it was not contemplated at the time of divorce. Each one of those factors has been the focus of dispute in a myriad of cases. 

Even when a change in circumstances is not permanent, a judge can adjust alimony to meet a temporary change. The parties can also agree to modify alimony. Agreements generally don’t form the basis for further dispute. Alimony modification cases are not only financially driven but carry a high degree of emotionality.

If the judge determines there has been a change in circumstances warranting adjustment of alimony, the judge does not have unlimited discretion. The judge must make findings for the same statutory factors as an initial alimony award. If the judge fails to do that, the modification is subject to reversal.

Judges have rarely terminated alimony based upon changed circumstances. Even where the change is so substantial as to apparently warrant termination, judges have instead reduced alimony to a nominal amount recognizing circumstances might change again.

Alimony recipients may avoid remarriage solely to avoid termination of their alimony income. No relationship except remarriage automatically terminates alimony. Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal ruled cohabitation was a factor to be considered as changed circumstances in the 1975 decision of Sheffield v. Sheffield, but explained cohabitation is not an automatic end to alimony. The Sheffield decision was followed by numerous other Florida appellate courts in the ensuing years.

In the 1973 case of Bridges v. Bridges, the alimony recipient was not only living with another man but also participated in a ceremony in which they exchanged vows and rings. At conclusion of the ceremony, the couple presented themselves as “partners in life.” The former husband argued that was a de facto marriage that should terminate alimony, but the appellate court disagreed. The court did explain the relationship could be sufficient to warrant a finding of changed circumstances if the cohabitant provided support to the recipient or even if the recipient contributed to the support of the cohabitant.

In 2005, Florida’s legislature weighed in by amending Florida alimony statutes. The statutes now mandate that a court reduce or terminate an award of support, maintenance or alimony if the court finds a supportive relationship has existed between the obligee and a person who is not related to the obligee. The burden is on the alimony payor to prove a supportive relationship exists or has existed in the 365 days before filing the petition for dissolution of marriage, separate maintenance, or a supplemental petition for modification. Once proven, the burden shifts to the recipient to prove the Court should not reduce support, maintenance or alimony.

The statute requires the court not only consider the same factors mandated for consideration in an initial alimony award but also the following additional factors: 

A. Extent to which the recipient and the other person held themselves out as a married couple;

B. Amount of time the recipient has resided with the other person;

C. Extent to which the recipient and the other person have pulled their assets or income;

D. Extent to which the recipient or other person has financially supported the other;

E. Extent to which the recipient by the other person has performed valuable services for the other;

F. Extent to which the recipient of the person has performed valuable services for the other’s business or employer;

G. Extent to which the recipient and the other person work together to acquire assets for enhanced value of assets;

H. Extent to which the recipient and the other person have jointly contributed to the purchase of any property;

I. Extent to which the recipient and the other person have an express or implied agreement regarding property sharing or financial support;

J. Extent to which the payor has paid the existing alimony award or failed to do so;

K. Extent to which the recipient and the other person have provided support to the children or other family members of one another, regardless of any legal duty to do so.

Cases decided after the statutory amendment have generally followed the decisions before the amendment concerning substantial change in circumstances. But judges now have statutory authority to not only modify, but also terminate alimony based upon a supportive relationship. In any event, effort to avoid termination of alimony by cohabitation instead of remarriage may not be successful.

William G. Morris is the principal of William G. Morris, P.A. William G. Morris and his firm have represented clients in Collier County for over 30 years. His practice includes litigation and divorce, business law, estate planning, associations and real estate. The information in this column is general in nature and not intended as legal advice.