Ridge v. Ridge, 14058
| Decision Date | 03 November 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 14058,14058 |
| Citation | 542 P.2d 189 |
| Parties | Alfred RIDGE, Jr., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Ruth Marie RIDGE, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Cullen Y. Christensen, of Christensen, Taylor & Moody, Provo, for defendant-appellant.
S. Rex Lewis, of Howard, Lewis & Peterson, Provo, for plaintiff-respondent.
A divorce decree was modified by the court below and the defendant here is seeking a reversal.
The parties were divorced by decree of the District Court of Utah County on January 31, 1974. Under the provisions of the decree, the plaintiff was ordered to pay to the defendant alimony in the sum of $625 per month until the defendant should remarry, become deceased, or until the further order of the court. At the time of the divorce it was contemplated that the plaintiff would require surgery to correct cataracts which had developed in his eyes. The decree provided that should the surgery be performed and during recuperation by the plaintiff, the alimony would be reduced to $300 per month for a period of not to exceed three months. After the hearing, the trial court made a finding that plaintiff's gross income from his dental practice was approximately $32,000 per annum, and that the defendant's annual gross income was approximately $4,100. During July of 1974, the plaintiff underwent the contemplated surgery and he was thereafter away from his dental practice for two months, returning to work on September 2, 1974. The plaintiff was current on his alimoney payments until December, 1974, and he then failed to pay for the month of December. The defendant obtained an order to show cause why the alimony had not been paid, and the plaintiff counterpetitioned for a reduction in alimony and the ultimate elimination thereof.
A trial was had and evidence was adduced which showed that the plaintiff's income from his practice had been reduced to the sum of $23,000 per year at the time of the modification hearing. At the modification hearing plaintiff testified that he had remarried and now has three minor children in his home, who are the children of his new wife. There was evidence to show that the income of the defendant had increased from approximately $4,100 per year to the sum of $4,500 per year.
After the modification hearing the court found and concluded that the prior decree should be amended so as to reduce the alimony payments to $500 per month to continue until July, 1978. In addition to that reduction the court went further and included the following provision in the decree of modification:
In July, 1978, the alimony payments will be reduced to $45.00 per month and continue thereafter until July 1, 1979, at which time the alimony payments will be reduced to $400.00 per month and continue thereafter until July 1, 1980, at which time the alimony payments will be reduced to $350.00 per month and continue thereafter until July 1, 1981, at which time the alimony payments will be reduced to $300.00 per...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Olsen v. Olsen
...is shown. See Embree v. Embree, 85 Idaho 443, 380 P.2d 216 (1963); Jarvis v. Jarvis, 218 Kan. 679, 544 P.2d 1384 (1976); Ridge v. Ridge, 542 P.2d 189 (Utah 1975). It is our opinion that no such abuse of discretion occurred in this Affirmed. Costs to respondent. McFADDEN, C. J., and BAKES, J......
-
Pearson v. Pearson, 14626
...Utah 325, 54 P.2d 425 (1936).8 Constitution of Utah, Art. 8, Sec. 9; Stone v. Stone, 19 Utah 2d 378, 431 P.2d 802 (1967); Ridge v. Ridge, Utah, 542 P.2d 189 (1975). ...
-
Stanton-Abbott v. Stanton-Abbott, STANTON-ABBOTT
...v. Stanaway, 70 Mich.App. 294, 245 N.W.2d 723 (1976); Hagbloom v. Hagbloom, 71 Mich.App. 257, 247 N.W.2d 373 (1976).)Ridge v. Ridge, 542 P.2d 189 (Utah 1975), also cited by the husband, simply holds that a provision of a judgment 'phasing out' the alimony obligation over a period of nine ye......
-
Stucki v. Stucki, 14563
...merely because it might view the matter differently, but only if evidence clearly preponderates against the findings. 2 The case of Ridge v. Ridge, supra, cited by plaintiff is also supportive of this Affirmed. Costs to defendant. ELLETT, C.J., and CROCKETT, MAUGHAN and WILKINS, JJ., concur......