Trammell v. Trammell

Decision Date27 September 1991
Citation589 So.2d 743
PartiesMyrtle Lee Baines TRAMMELL v. Dale Edward TRAMMELL. 2900560.
CourtAlabama Court of Civil Appeals

Jon B. Terry of Bains and Terry, Bessemer, for appellant.

John S. Key of Eyster, Key, Tubb, Weaver & Roth, Decatur, for appellee.

L. CHARLES WRIGHT, Retired Appellate Judge.

Following a ten-year marriage, the parties were divorced in April 1978 by the Circuit Court of Morgan County. The divorce decree, which incorporated the terms of the parties' written agreement, required the husband to pay to the wife $1,200 per month for child support and alimony. The award was to decrease to $700 per month upon the "death, marriage or the attainment of majority" of the parties' minor son.

In June 1981 the minor son moved in with the husband. The husband unilaterally decreased the amount of support paid to the wife to $700.

In December 1987 the husband filed a motion to modify the divorce decree, seeking to terminate his alimony obligation. Following ore tenus proceedings, the trial court granted the husband's motion. The wife appeals.

Although the wife filed a motion requesting that the trial court find the husband in arrears in his support obligation, the issue presented on this appeal is concerned only with the termination of the wife's alimony.

The dispositive issue is whether the trial court erred to reversal in terminating the husband's alimony obligation.

The matter of alimony is entrusted to the discretion of the trial court. This court will not set aside that judgment unless an abuse of discretion is established. Waltman v. Waltman, 528 So.2d 867 (Ala.Civ.App.1988).

The award of periodic alimony may be modified by the trial court upon the showing of a material change in circumstances. Waltman. The burden is upon the party seeking the modification to show that a material change has occurred. Jeffcoat v. Jeffcoat, 423 So.2d 888 (Ala.Civ.App.1982).

The purpose of periodic alimony is the support of the former dependent spouse. Allen v. Allen, 477 So.2d 457 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). The trial court may terminate periodic alimony when the former spouse is no longer in need of such support. Allen. The husband's ability to respond to the wife's financial needs is a major factor in determining whether an award of periodic alimony should be modified. Stewart v. Stewart, 536 So.2d 91 (Ala.Civ.App.1988).

Where the provision for periodic alimony is based upon the agreement of the parties, as in this case, the decree should be modified only for clear and sufficient reasons after a thorough investigation. Stewart.

In the present case the husband avers that there has been a material and significant change in the circumstances of the parties warranting a termination of his alimony obligation. His position to terminate the alimony is not based on his inability to make the payments financially. Instead, he contends that the wife's marketability in the job market has greatly increased since the divorce due to her procurement of a master's degree in theology.

The record reflects that the husband is a surgeon with an extensive medical practice and that he has remarried. He earned approximately $192,000 in 1987. At the time of the hearing his approximate net worth was $987,000.

The wife earned a degree in sociology and psychology prior to the marriage. She was employed for the first two years of the marriage. After the divorce the wife moved to Nashville and entered the Vanderbilt Divinity School. She stayed in Nashville for one semester and subsequently transferred to Fuller Seminary in Pasadena,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Knight v. Knight
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • July 29, 2016
    ...; Welch v. Welch, 636 So.2d 464 (Ala.Civ.App.1994) ; Thornburg v. Thornburg, 628 So.2d 885 (Ala.Civ.App.1993) ; Trammell v. Trammell, 589 So.2d 743 (Ala.Civ.App.1991). This abbreviated statement found its genesis in Waltman v. Waltman, 528 So.2d 867 (Ala.Civ.App.1988). In Waltman, this cour......
  • O'Neal v. O'Neal
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • March 1, 1996
    ...Welch v. Welch, 636 So.2d 464 (Ala.Civ.App.1994); Thornburg v. Thornburg, 628 So.2d 885 (Ala.Civ.App.1993); Trammell v. Trammell, 589 So.2d 743 (Ala.Civ.App.1991). This abbreviated statement found its genesis in Waltman v. Waltman, 528 So.2d 867 (Ala.Civ.App.1988). In Waltman, this court st......
  • Byrd v. Byrd
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • July 1, 2016
    ...is based upon the agreement of the parties, that provision should not be modified without close scrutiny, see, e.g., Trammell v. Trammell, 589 So.2d 743 (Ala.Civ.App.1991), especially when a short time, in this case only approximately 17 months, separates the modification hearing from the p......
  • Santiago v. Santiago
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • March 8, 2013
    ...based upon the agreement of the parties, that provision should not be modified without close scrutiny, see, e.g., Trammell v. Trammell, 589 So.2d 743 (Ala.Civ.App.1991), especially when a short time, in this case only approximately 17 months, separates the modification hearing from the prev......
  • 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