Spencer-Steed v. Spencer

• Decision Date: 21 December 1988
• Docket Number: No. 17150,SPENCER-STEED,17150
• Citation: 766 P.2d 1219,115 Idaho 338
• Parties: Mary C.Plaintiff-Respondent, Cross-Appellant, v. David A. SPENCER, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Respondent.
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

Page 1219

766 P.2d 1219

115 Idaho 338

Mary C. SPENCER-STEED Plaintiff-Respondent, Cross-Appellant, v. David A. SPENCER, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Respondent.

No. 17150.

Supreme Court of Idaho.

Dec. 21, 1988.

Clark & Feeney, Lewiston, for defendant-appellant, cross-respondent. Paul T. Clark argued.

Randall, Blake, Cox, Risley & Trout, Lewiston, for plaintiff-respondent, cross-appellant. Kim Jay Trout argued.

JOHNSON, Justice.

This is a contract action to enforce portions of a property settlement, custody, support and maintenance agreement that provided for alimony and that was alleged to provide for support for an adult child. The principal issues are whether the agreement was merged into the divorce decree, whether the agreement provided for support for the adult child, and whether there was a basis for the punitive damages claim. We hold that the agreement was not merged into the divorce decree, that the agreement is ambiguous as to whether it provides support for the adult child, and that there was no basis for the punitive damages claim.

I. THE AGREEMENT

Mary and David were married to each other from 1961 until January 1982. In December 1981 they entered into a property settlement, custody, support and maintenance agreement (the agreement). The agreement stated that it was intended to set forth, among other things, their agreement concerning the support and maintenance of their three minor children and of Mary. The names and dates of birth of the children were stated in the agreement to be: Grant, born May 22, 1966; Craig, born May 22, 1969; and Angela, born June 29, 1970. In the agreement Mary and David jointly requested that the court having jurisdiction of a pending divorce action between them in Nez Perce County, Idaho ratify, confirm and approve the agreement, but that the agreement should not be merged into or incorporated in any decree of divorce. They also agreed that the entire agreement was "an integrated agreement," with every provision or term constituting consideration for each and every other provision or term of the agreement. They agreed in particular that the provisions relating to a division of property and the provisions relating to David's obligation to provide for the support and maintenance of Mary "constitute reciprocal consideration."

The agreement contained the following section concerning the support of the minor children:

SUPPORT OF MINOR CHILDREN

Subject to approval of the Court having jurisdiction of the pending divorce action HUSBAND agrees to pay to The support payments provided for hereinabove and hereinbelow shall be due and payable on the 10th day of each and every calendar month, commencing with the month of September, 1981, and shall continue thereafter to and including the month of August, 1985, or until the calendar month following the month in which WIFE should remarry, whichever first occurs.

[115 Idaho 340] WIFE, commencing with the month of September, 1981, the sum of $333.33 per month for the support and maintenance of GRANT S. SPENCER, the sum of $333.33 per month for the support and maintenance of CRAIG R. SPENCER, and the sum of $333.34 per month for the support and maintenance of ANGELA SPENCER. Such support payments shall be made by HUSBAND directly to WIFE, the parties hereby requesting the Court having jurisdiction of the pending divorce action to enter an order directing that all child support payments be paid directly to WIFE rather than through the Clerk of the District Court, the parties hereto deeming it to be in the best interests of all parties and of said minor children if such support payments were ordered paid directly to WIFE.

Commencing with the month of September, 1985, or commencing with the calendar month immediately following the month in which WIFE should remarry, whichever first occurs, HUSBAND agrees to pay to WIFE for the support and maintenance of those of the children of the parties hereto who are then yet minors the sum of $500.00 per month per child, increased by a percentage thereof equal to 80% of the percentage increase, if any, in the Consumer Price Index for the All Items Group as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States for the month of September, 1981, as compared to either the month of July, 1985, or the calendar month in which WIFE should remarry, whichever shall first occur.

For purposes of illustration, and by way of example only, assume:

(1) that such Consumer Price Index for the month of September, 1981, is 225, and that such Consumer Price Index for the month of July, 1985, or the calendar month in which WIFE remarries (should WIFE remarry before July, 1985), is 300;

(2) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index is 33 1/3% (i.e., 300-225 = 75; 75 divided by 225 = 33 1/3% increase in the Consumer Price Index);

(3) eighty (80%) percent of 33 1/3% equals 26.6%;

(4) the amount of child support for each child, commencing either the month of September, 1985 or commencing the calendar month following the month in which WIFE should remarry, whichever first occurs, will be $500.00, increased by 26.6% thereof, or a total for each child per month of $633.00.

So long as HUSBAND is not in default in payment of the child support herein agreed to be paid, HUSBAND shall be entitled to claim said minor children, and each of them, as dependents for federal and state income tax purposes.

HUSBAND further agrees to keep and maintain, at his sole cost, such insurance as will pay the cost of providing medical and dental care and hospitalization, and all costs of medical and dental prostheses and appliances, and medicine or drugs as shall be prescribed by a physician or dentist for each of the minor children of the parties hereto. At such time as the HUSBAND'S duty to provide for the support and maintenance of any child of the parties hereto shall terminate, HUSBAND shall be under no obligation to provide such insurance or pay any medical or dental expenses for such child. HUSBAND further agrees to pay all such costs to the extent of any such costs are not covered by such insurance; it being the express intent of this provision that HUSBAND will pay the costs of providing medical care, dental care, hospitalization, medical and dental prostheses and appliances, and medicine or drugs as shall be prescribed by a physician or dentist for each minor child so long as HUSBAND is obligated to The alimony provisions of the agreement stated, in part:

[115 Idaho 341] provide for the support and maintenance of such minor children regardless of whether or not any such costs are covered by any such insurance, or to the extent that any such costs are not covered by any such insurance.

ALIMONY FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT OF WIFE

HUSBAND agrees to pay to WIFE, as alimony for the support and maintenance of WIFE the following sums:

(a) the sum of TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED ($2,500) DOLLARS per month for a period of thirty-six (36) consecutive months, commencing with the month of September, 1981, and each such monthly payment shall be due and payable on or before the last day of each and every such month; provided, however, that in addition to said monthly payments, HUSBAND further agrees to pay to WIFE, as alimony for the support and maintenance of WIFE, an additional sum of $8,000, which said sum shall be due and payable immediately upon entry of a decree of divorce in the above entitled matter, and which said sum shall be in addition to the regular monthly payment of $2,500 due for the month in which such decree of divorce is entered; and

(b) the sum of TWO THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FIFTY ($2,150) DOLLARS per month for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, commencing with the month of September, 1984; such monthly payments under this Subparagraph (b) shall be due and payable on or before the last day of September, 1984, and each succeeding monthly payment under this Subparagraph (b) shall be due and payable on or before the last day of each of the next succeeding 11 calendar months.

....

HUSBAND'S obligation to pay support and maintenance to WIFE under Subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this Paragraph VII, shall terminate upon the first of the following events to occur:

(i) the death of WIFE;

(ii) the remarriage of WIFE.

....

Upon the death or remarriage of WIFE, whichever shall first occur, HUSBAND shall be under no further obligation to make any payments of alimony to WIFE for her support and maintenance under the provisions of Subparagraphs (a) or (b), and neither WIFE nor her estate shall, following her death or remarriage, be required to refund to HUSBAND any sums theretofore paid by HUSBAND to WIFE for her support and maintenance pursuant to the provisions of Subparagraphs (a) and (b).

....

The agreement also contained a provision entitling the prevailing party to attorney fees in any suit or action to enforce, or for the breach of, any of the terms conditions or covenants of the agreement.

II. THE DECREE OF DIVORCE

In January 1982 a decree of divorce (the decree) was entered in the district court in Nez Perce County, Idaho, granting David a divorce from Mary. The decree contained the following order concerning child support:

Plaintiff is hereby ordered to pay to the defendant for the care, maintenance and support of said minor children the sum of $333.33 per month; that said support shall be paid directly to the defendant, rather than through the Clerk of the District Court.

Said support payments provided for hereinabove and hereinbelow shall be due and payable on the 10th day of each and every calendar month commencing with the month of September, 1981, and shall continue thereafter to and including the month of August, 1985, or until the calendar month following the month in which the defendant should remarry, whichever first occurs.

Commencing with the month of September, 1985, or commencing with the calendar month immediately following the month in which the defendant should...