In Re Marriage of Benson

Good Law
171 Cal. App. 3d 907·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 2464·217 Cal. Rptr. 589
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 29, 1985G000451California5,914 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Crosby, J.

May spousal support be extended before it lapses under the terms of a judgment based on a marital settlement agreement? Yes.

*910 I

Clifford and Phyllis Benson separated in 1977 after 31 years of marriage. Each retained counsel, and within a few months a marital settlement agreement was finalized. It was approved by the court and incorporated into an interlocutory judgment of dissolution of marriage. Both documents were drafted by husband’s attorney. The provision for wife’s support reads as follows: “[Husband] shall pay to [wife] as and for spousal support the sum of $650.00 per month, payable on the 1st day of each month, commencing June 1, 1977, and continuing until the death of either party, [wife’s] remarriage, until modified by a court of competent jurisdiction or until the expiration of eight (8) years, whichever first occurs. [Italics added.]”

Five years later wife, then age 59, petitioned for an increase in support. She testified she required eye surgery and extensive dental work, but had no funds and inadequate insurance coverage. Her daily living expenses were steadily increasing, and she had been forced to sell a number of household items and jewelry to…

Dissenting Opinion

Sonenshine, J.

I respectfully dissent. I do not believe the court had jurisdiction to extend the support obligation beyond the specified termination date.

Unless jurisdiction is retained, the court loses its ability to extend support. (Civ. Code, § 4801, subd. (d).) And In re Marriage of Vomacka (1984) 36 Cal.3d 459 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 568 , 683 P.2d 248 ] did not repeal this legislative mandate. The Vomacka court simply found the underlying order implied a retention of jurisdiction. No such interpretation can be made here.

*915 There are, of course, similarities between the Vomacka order and the present one: each provides for the payment of a specified amount of support pending the first to occur of four contingencies, i.e., death of either party, remarriage of wife, modification by court, 2 or a specified date. Thus, the trial court in each case had jurisdiction to modify the amount of the award at any time prior to the specified date.

But there is one critical distinction: the Vomacka order contains an express reservation of jurisdiction “regarding spousal support” until a date certain, at which time the wife’s “right to request spousal support shall terminate forever.” It is this language,…

Opinion

May spousal support be extended before it lapses under the terms of a judgment based on a marital settlement agreement? Yes.

Clifford and Phyllis Benson separated in 1977 after 31 years of marriage. Each retained counsel, and within a few months a marital settlement agreement was finalized. It was approved by the court and incorporated into an interlocutory judgment of dissolution of marriage. Both documents were drafted by husband's attorney. The provision for wife's support reads as follows: "[Husband] shall pay to [wife] as and for spousal support the sum of $650.00 per month, payable on the 1st day of each month, commencing June 1, 1977, and continuing until the death of either party, [wife's] remarriage, until modified by a court of competent jurisdiction or until the expiration of eight (8) years, whichever first occurs. [Italics added.]"

Five years later wife, then age 59, petitioned for an increase in support. She testified she required eye surgery and extensive dental work, but had no funds and inadequate insurance coverage. Her daily living expenses were steadily increasing, and she had been forced to sell a number of household items and jewelry to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.