Doyle v. Doyle
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Stone County to the Missouri Court of Appeals – Southern District
NO SD37320
Filed June 23, 2022
Outcome: Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part and Remanded with Directions
The parties L. Doyle (hereinafter “Husband”) and C. Doyle (hereinafter “Wife”) were married in 1995 and divorced in 2020. As part of the divorce judgment, the trial court divided the parties’ marital property, allocated their debts, and awarded Wife $750 per month non-modifiable maintenance.
Husband filed a two-point appeal and argued as follows: (1) the trial court erred in awarding Wife maintenance at all, and if she was entitled to maintenance and (2) the amount awarded was not correct.
At the time of trial, both parties submitted their financial information on their Statements of Income and Expenses. Wife testified that her net take home pay was $1,808.00 per month and that her average monthly expenses were $2,000.00. However, this did not include additional expenses such as: “car repairs, dental, medical, vision, emergencies, gifts, car payments, retirement or savings[.]” The court estimated that these additional reasonable expenses could total $1,250/month. Based on this analysis, Wife’s reasonable needs totaled $3,100/month.
Husband testified that his net monthly income was $5,216.39. His average monthly expenses were $2,975.96, which included Wife’s $472.32 share of Husband’s military retirement benefit that would begin once the dissolution was final.
On appeal, Husband argued that the trial court erred by awarding maintenance to Wife because she was able to meet her reasonable needs with her income from employment.
The Appellate Court noted that: A trial court may grant maintenance if it finds that the spouse seeking maintenance:
(1) lacks sufficient property, including marital property apportioned to him or her, to provide for his or her reasonable needs; and (2) is unable to support himself or herself through appropriate employment. See § 452.335.1. A trial court must follow the two-part threshold test set out in section 452.335.1 when awarding maintenance. Ross, 231 S.W.3d at 884. The trial court judges the credibility of witnesses and evaluates the merits of the claimed expenses with the burden of showing need on the party requesting maintenance. Id. Although maintenance awards are reviewed only for abuse of discretion, such awards cannot stand without supporting evidence. Id.
In the present case, the trial court was required to determine whether Wife could meet her reasonable needs through appropriate employment. The Appellate court emphasized that, “our review of the record demonstrates that there is evidence to support the court’s finding that Wife had $1,850 per month in expenses. There is no evidence in the record to support the court’s estimate that Wife needed an additional $1,250 per month to meet her reasonable needs.” For instance, Wife testified that she would need to get her own health insurance coverage once the divorce was final but no evidence was provided as to how much replacement coverage would cost.
The trial court’s award of non-modifiable maintenance is reversed. The cause is remanded for the parties to present additional evidence relevant to the issue of maintenance (including Wife’s updated monthly expenses) for the trial court’s consideration. The Appellate Opinion only dealt with point I since it vacated the maintenance award and therefore point II was not addressed.
