Huldtquist v. Huldtquist

Decision Date21 November 1984
Citation465 So.2d 1146
PartiesElmer Guy HULDTQUIST v. Vonna R. Hambleton HULDTQUIST. Civ. 4432.
CourtAlabama Court of Civil Appeals

Ernest H. Hornsby of Johnson, Huskey, Hornsby & Etheredge, Dothan, for appellant.

Edward Jackson, Dothan, for appellee.

WRIGHT, Presiding Judge.

This is a divorce case involving an award of alimony.

The parties were divorced on February 22, 1974, after twenty-six years of marriage. The decree, entered by the United States District Court of the Panama Canal Zone, provided for alimony consisting of $400 per month for the first six months, and further said:

"that the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant the sum of $350.00 per month thereafter for a period of twelve (12) months, and, thereafter, the sum of $300.00 per month for a period of eight (8) years, all of the aforesaid to be paid to the defendant for the aforesaid period of time or the defendant's remarriage, whichever shall occur the soonest; and, further, the defendant is not foreclosed by this order from coming into Court at the expiration of the aforesaid eight (8) year period and petition this Court for any further reasonable alimony that the defendant may deem necessary and required, this Court taking into consideration in ordering the aforesaid provision the great length of time the parties have been married and that the plaintiff during his marriage to defendant did accumulate a retirement fund;"

The last alimony payment under the original decree was made in August of 1983. On December 16, 1983, the wife filed a petition for enforcement of and further adjudication under the divorce decree.

The husband was in the Federal Civil Service at the time of the divorce. He has since retired and now receives approximately $2,100 per month in retirement pay. He has also remarried and now estimates his family expenses as equivalent to his income. For this reason, he states that he is financially unable to pay alimony.

The wife has had mental and health problems since around the time of the divorce in 1974. Her doctors diagnose her as manic-depressive. She has received job training from the Florida Mental Health Rehabilitation Service in several areas, including typing, key-punch, hotel management, and travel agency work. Despite this training, the wife has held a job for no longer than eight months. She testified that although presently her health was improving, she has been unable to find work. Her present income consists of $500 per month in V.A benefits and approximately $100 per month in interest from her savings account.

The trial court awarded the wife periodic alimony of $300 per month. The husband appeals, claiming this to be a modification-of-alimony case and that the wife did not meet her burden of proof of showing a change of circumstances.

The payments set out in the original divorce decree were periodic alimony. Although the time of payment and amount of payment were certain, the purpose of the payments was not to replace the wife's inchoate rights in the husband's estate (alimony in gross), but rather to pay...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Knight v. Knight
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • July 29, 2016
    ...; Kuhnel v. Kuhnel, 535 So.2d 164 (Ala.Civ.App.1988) ; Carnaggio v. Carnaggio, 475 So.2d 861 (Ala.Civ.App.1985) ; Huldtquist v. Huldtquist, 465 So.2d 1146 (Ala.Civ.App.1984) ; West v. West, 437 So.2d 583 (Ala.Civ.App.1983) ; Madden v. Madden, 399 So.2d 304 (Ala.Civ.App.1981) ; Dees v. Dees,......
  • O'Neal v. O'Neal
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • March 1, 1996
    ...Kuhnel v. Kuhnel, 535 So.2d 164 (Ala.Civ.App.1988); Carnaggio v. Carnaggio, 475 So.2d 861 (Ala.Civ.App.1985); Huldtquist v. Huldtquist, 465 So.2d 1146 (Ala.Civ.App.1984); West v. West, 437 So.2d 583 (Ala.Civ.App.1983); Madden v. Madden, 399 So.2d 304 (Ala.Civ.App.1981); Dees v. Dees, 390 So......
  • Davis v. Davis
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • October 12, 2012
    ...55, 299 So.2d 743, 750 (1974), and the award in this case was specifically designated as “spousal support.” See Huldtquist v. Huldtquist, 465 So.2d 1146, 1148 (Ala.Civ.App.1984) (construing a judgment ordering payments of $350 per month for 12 months, and then $300 a month for 8 years, to b......
  • Frye v. Frye
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • December 7, 2012
    ...to be for the future support of the former wife payable from the current earnings of the former husband. See Huldtquist v. Huldtquist, 465 So.2d 1146, 1148 (Ala.Civ.App.1984) (construing a judgment ordering payments of $350 per month for 12 months, and then $300 a month for 8 years, to be p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT