Reeves v. Reeves, 2
Decision Date | 02 May 1985 |
Docket Number | No. 2,CA-CIV,2 |
Citation | 706 P.2d 1238,146 Ariz. 471 |
Parties | John B. REEVES, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Anvline REEVES, Respondent/Appellee. 5255. |
Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
The Reeves' marriage of 37 years was dissolved by decree entered in June 1984. Mrs. Reeves suffered medical problems, had a tenth grade education and had worked in the home throughout her marriage. Mr. Reeves was 61 years old. The decree awarded $400 each month in spousal maintenance to Mrs. Reeves. The decree stated that:
Mr. Reeves appeals from this portion of the decree arguing that it forecloses him from making a showing of changed circumstances if he retires at age 62.
A.R.S. § 25-327(A) provides that a maintenance decree may be modified "only upon a showing of changed circumstances which are substantial and continuing." "The changed circumstances alleged must be proved by a comparison with the circumstances existing at dissolution." Richards v. Richards, 137 Ariz. 225, 226, 669 P.2d 1002, 1003 (App.1983). One of the circumstances existing at the time the Reeves' marriage was dissolved was Mr. Reeves' plan to voluntarily retire within the year. The extent to which this would reduce his income was known to the trial judge. A diminution in income anticipated by the trial judge in making an award is, when it occurs, not a changed circumstance justifying a modification of the award. See Linton v. Linton, 17 Ariz.App. 560, 499 P.2d 174 (1972). The portion of the decree to which Mr. Reeves objects is simply a statement that the court had considered the reduced income on retirement in making the award. It had the additional virtue of warning Mr. Reeves of circumstances that...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Little v. Little
...988 (App.1998) (incarceration); Burnette v. Bender, 184 Ariz. 301, 908 P.2d 1086 (App.1995) (sale of business); Reeves v. Reeves, 146 Ariz. 471, 706 P.2d 1238 (App.1985) (retirement); Fletcher v. Fletcher, 137 Ariz. 497, 671 P.2d 938 (App.1983) (layoff); Platt v. Platt, 17 Ariz.App. 458, 49......
-
Pullen v. Pullen
...one may, by a voluntary act, reduce one's income is not necessarily a ground for modification of a maintenance decree." 146 Ariz. 471, 473, 706 P.2d 1238, 1240 (App.1985). He suggests that this statement indicates there should be a case by case analysis of instances of reduced income, and t......
-
Proctor v. Proctor
...criminal act, nonetheless retains the ability to earn and the duty to support his or her children. See, e.g., Reeves v. Reeves, 146 Ariz. 471, 706 P.2d 1238 (Ct.App.1985) (voluntary retirement does not affect one's ability to earn in the labor market); Rapson v. Rapson, 165 Colo. 188, 437 P......
-
Carroll v.
...Jeff's earning ability based on his pre-retirement employment or balanced the factors set forth in § 25-319(B). See Reeves v. Reeves, 146 Ariz. 471, 473 (App. 1985) (court not required to take husband's desire to retire shortly after decree into account in setting spousal maintenance becaus......