Nowlin v. Nowlin
| Decision Date | 17 August 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 19811-CA,19811-CA |
| Citation | 535 So.2d 825 |
| Parties | Lilli Ann Stewart NOWLIN, Appellant, v. Bobby Ray NOWLIN, Appellee. 535 So.2d 825 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
John S. Odom, Jr., Shreveport, for appellant.
Richard Snell, Bossier City, for appellee.
Before HALL, FRED W. JONES, Jr. and NORRIS, JJ.
Plaintiff-in-rule sued his former wife to either terminate or reduce permanent alimony. From a judgment reducing the alimony, the former wife appealed and the plaintiff-in-rule answered, requesting that the alimony be terminated. For the reasons explained hereinafter, we affirm.
Bobby Ray Nowlin and Lilli Ann Stewart Nowlin were divorced in March 1985. Mrs. Nowlin was awarded permanent alimony of $800 per month and child support for two children in the sum of $600 per month. Upon appeal of the judgment as to permanent alimony, we reduced the award to $500 per month. See Nowlin v. Nowlin, 482 So.2d 882 (La.App. 2d Cir.1986).
Nowlin remarried in April 1985. A child was born of this marriage in May 1985 and another was born in late 1986. His former wife quit school and obtained a job in a local bank. Alleging these changes in circumstances, Nowlin filed this rule to terminate or reduce the alimony award to his former wife. The rule was tried in May 1987.
At the hearing on the rule it was established that Nowlin had remarried and that two children were born of this marriage. As a member of the armed services, he had been promoted from Major to Lt. Colonel and anticipated a pay raise of $300 per month. He had also received a cost-of-living increase. Nowlin's gross salary was $4258.69 and his take-home pay (including his second wife's $125 per month from reserve duty and his anticipated net raise of $200) was $3800 per month.
In her 1985 affidavit of income and expenses Mrs. Nowlin claimed that she and her two daughters required $1593.93 per month. With child support and alimony her income was $1400 per month. However, after this court reduced the alimony to $500 per month, that income was reduced to $1100 per month. Consequently, Mrs. Nowlin stopped pursuing her college education and took a job as a bank employee at a monthly salary of $610. This made her monthly income $1710 against claimed monthly expenses of $1813.40.
In oral reasons for judgment, stating that he had considered Mrs. Nowlin's earning capacity, the trial judge reduced the monthly alimony to $225.
Mrs. Nowlin argues that her former husband, earning a gross salary in excess of $4200 per month, is able to pay the $500 per month. On the other hand, Nowlin contends that his former wife is not entitled to any permanent alimony since the amount she now earns as salary is the same amount that had been previously determined to cover her basic needs.
Louisiana law provides alimony for a spouse in need in La.C.C. Art. 160:
The code article providing permanent periodic alimony also specifies revocation when the alimony is no longer necessary. The spouse who wishes a reduction or termination in his alimony obligation may seek revocation or reduction when a significant change in circumstances proves the recipient now has sufficient means for support or the payor's ability to pay has changed. Loyacano v. Loyacano, 358 So.2d 304 (La.1978); Martin v. Martin, 457 So.2d 189 (La.App. 2d Cir.1984); Gray v. Gray, 451 So.2d 579 (La.App. 2d Cir.1984), writ denied, 457 So.2d 13 (La.1984); Rains v Rains, 376 So.2d 1298 (La.App. 2d Cir.1979).
This court stated in Gray, supra;
In evaluating whether alimony is needed and therefore legally appropriate, the courts must examine the totality of the circumstances indicative of the parties'...
To continue reading
Request your trial