Shannon v. Shannon, 14165

Decision Date07 October 1980
Docket NumberNo. 14165,14165
PartiesGeraldine SHANNON v. Emerson Grant SHANNON.
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

"The right to fix the amount of alimony rests in the sound discretion of the chancellor, and this Court will not disturb his judgment unless he has grossly abused such discretion." Syl. pt. 2, Henrie v. Henrie, 71 W.Va. 131, 76 S.E. 837 (1912).

Grove Moler, Mullens, for appellant.

Preiser & Wilson and R. Joseph Zak, Charleston, for appellee.


The appellant, Geraldine Shannon, appeals from a final order of the Circuit Court of Wyoming County, West Virginia, modifying the original divorce decree by reducing the alimony payments. We conclude that there was no legal error committed in the proceedings below, and that the trial court did not clearly abuse its discretion in ordering a reduction in the amount of alimony.

This divorce proceeding was originally instituted by the appellant. The final divorce decree awarded $800.00 a month in alimony and support, $200.00 of which was for the support and maintenance of their oldest child who was attending college, and $100.00 was for the support and maintenance of their remaining child, a high school senior. After the two children finished school, the appellee continued to pay the appellant $500.00 a month.

In January 1977, the appellee, pursuant to W.Va. Code, 48-2-15, moved the circuit court to reopen the civil action alleging that the financial status of the parties had changed materially since the entry of the divorce decree. The appellee sought a hearing on the financial conditions of the parties and prayed that alimony and support payments be terminated. On July 25, 1977, the circuit court conducted a hearing wherein both parties appeared, testified, and presented evidence. The evidence adduced related to the assets and income of both parties. See, W.Va. Code, 48-2-16. These proceedings culminated in the entry of an order on August 5, 1977, which reduced the amount of alimony from $500.00 per month to $300.00. The trial court concluded from the evidence presented that the earning capacity and the income of the appellant had been substantially improved, that the alimony payments she received were only a portion of her income, and that the financial position of the appellee, in light of all the circumstances, justified a reduction.

The appellant makes several assignments of error which are clearly not supported by the law of this jurisdiction and do not warrant discussion. Appellant also argues that there was no evidence supporting a reduction in the amount of alimony and thus the trial court in so ordering abused its discretion.

The trial court is vested with wide discretion...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Goff v. Goff
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 15 Abril 1987
    ... ... ---, 329 S.E.2d 100 (1985); Zirkle v. Zirkle, --- W.Va. ---, 304 S.E.2d 664 (1983); Shannon v. Shannon, 165 W.Va. 662, 270 ... [177 W.Va. 746] S.E.2d 785 (1980). 2 Nevertheless, the ... ...
  • Harris v. Harris
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • 24 Septiembre 1987
    ...the criterion, wife's income from cohabitating male should be weighed in determining the maintenance to be paid); Shannon v. Shannon, 165 W.Va. 662, 270 S.E.2d 785, 787 (1980) (fact that wife's adult-aged, fully-employed daughter was residing with the wife reduced the need of the wife, just......
  • Lengyel v. Lint
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 30 Junio 1981
    ...with this opinion. Reversed and Remanded. 1 As in the past we here use the general term "real estate agent", see, e. g. Shannon v. Shannon, 270 S.E.2d 785 (W.Va.1980); Sanders v. Roselawn Memorial Gardens, Inc., 152 W.Va. 91, 159 S.E.2d 784 (1968), rather than the statutory terms provided f......
  • Zirkle v. Zirkle
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 22 Junio 1983
    ...discretion of the trial court and, consequently, will not be disturbed unless there is a clear abuse of discretion. Shannon v. Shannon, 165 W.Va. 662, 270 S.E.2d 785 (1980); Waller v. Waller, 166 W.Va. 142, 272 S.E.2d 671 (1980). However, the authority of the trial court to modify an alimon......
  • 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