Samson

Samson v. Samson

Good Law
127 Cal. Rptr. 3d 857·197 Cal. App. 4th 23
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 5, 2011No. B224899California2,710 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Epstein, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying appellant Richard Samson’s motion for modification of temporary spousal support. We reverse to the extent that the family court incorrectly allocated Richard’s 1 severance pay to a single month for purposes of a provision in the parties’ stipulated support order requiring Richard to pay respondent Elaine Tong Samson 35 percent of his monthly compensation in excess of $25,000. This percentage-based component of the stipulated order, modeled after In re Marriage of Ostler & Smith (1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 33 [ 272 Cal.Rptr. 560 ] (Ostler & Smith), was intended to apply to Richard’s variable monthly income from commissions, not to a one-time lump-sum severance pay. We affirm in all other respects.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

The parties were married in 1985 and separated in 2007. Elaine filed a petition for dissolution and sought temporary spousal support in March 2008. Richard, a mutual funds wholesaler, argued that spousal support should be based on his base salary with an Ostler & Smith adjustment for sales commissions he received above his base salary. In May 2008, the court ordered Richard to pay Elaine $15,031 per month and 35…

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.