Putnam v. Putnam, NC Court of Appeals, August 3, 2021 (Alimony)

Husband and wife resolved equitable distribution via a consent order. Pursuant to the terms of that order, husband retained the parties’ business and paid wife a distributive award of approximately $3,000,000. Alimony and child support were later heard by the trial court. Wife’s financial affidavit listed monthly expenses for herself and the children totaling approximately $18,000. The trial court found that some of the expenses were unreasonable but did not specify which expenses were unreasonable. Ultimately, the court found that the reasonable amount for monthly expenses for wife and the children was $13,677.56 and entered an order awarding wife $2,100 per month in alimony, $1,900 per month in child support, and $72,617 in support arrears. Wife appealed the alimony order.

On appeal, wife argued that the trial court abused its discretion in its award of alimony and that the alimony award should have been higher. Wife argued that in determining this amount, the trial court did not properly consider the parties’ standard of living during the marriage. The Court of Appeals disagreed, noting that the trial court made numerous findings about the parties’ expenses during and after the marriage and found, generally, that the parties lived an extravagant lifestyle during the marriage. Wife also argued that the trial court erred in its determination that some of her expenses were not reasonable and that the trial court was required to itemize which expenses it found to be unreasonable.

The Court of Appeals again disagreed, noting that the determination of the reasonableness of expenses is within the discretion of the trial court, the court is not required to accept at face value a party’s assertions regarding expenses, the judge may rely upon his own “common sense and every-day experiences in calculating the reasonable needs and expenses of the parties,” and there is no requirement to itemize reasonable and unreasonable expenses – the court need only provide sufficient detail to allow the Court of Appeals to determine that the trial court properly considered relevant
factors.

September 30, 2021/by FamilyLaw