.webp)
Two of the most commonly awarded forms of alimony are rehabilitative and indefinite alimony. In the past, we have covered types of alimony, but we haven’t fully explored the judicial reasoning involved with the determination to award one type of alimony over another. As regular readers will likely know, rehabilitative alimony is always finite, meaning that it involves the payment of fixed monthly amounts over a certain period of time, and is primarily concerned with ensuring that fairness is achieved as the recipient spouse transitions to become more self supporting. Indefinite alimony, by contrast, is implemented on a continuous, unending basis, although an award of indefinite alimony can certainly be modified or even terminated depending on the introduction of new circumstances. In some cases, for instance, a spouse who suffers an illness which unexpectedly improves may suddenly supply grounds for modifying or removing an indefinite alimony award to the other spouse.
In the case of Day v. Day (2025), a rehabilitative alimony award was overturned in favor of an indefinite award, something which seldom tends to happen. Let’s look at the details of this case more clearly so we can better understand how these awards are determined.
Facts of the Case
The spouses in this case were married for nearly 40 years. Both spouses worked consistently during the marriage, but the wife stopped working about two years prior to the separation due to a health condition. Because of the wife’s health at the time of the divorce, the wife requested indefinite alimony. Apparently, the wife’s health situation was quite serious, as she was unable to use her hands, or remain seated or stand for extended periods. After trial, the court granted the wife rehabilitative alimony of $1,000 per month for 24 months. The court reasoned that this temporary support of $1,000 would be sufficient to bridge the gap until the wife became more self supportive.
Importantly, the wife had argued that she wouldn’t necessarily become fully self supportive after a period of 2 years; given the severity of her illnesses, she would likely remain in an unacceptable financial situation for a substantial period beyond that point.
Outcome & Discussion
The appellate division overturned the trial court and granted the wife the indefinite alimony she originally requested. Although this isn’t a familiar scenario, the logic provided by the appellate court was quite sound: indefinite alimony is generally only awarded under “exceptional circumstances,” and those circumstances only encompass a few rare situations such as permanent disabilities or debilitating illnesses. In other words, a party basically needs to demonstrate that he or she either won’t be able to progress toward a greater economic condition, or that such a scenario is highly unlikely.
In this case, the trial court neglected to consider the arguments and evidence provided by the wife in her request for indefinite alimony. In actuality, the wife provided substantial evidence that she was very unlikely to improve within 2 years, because her ailments were serious. Given her current status, she was not likely to obtain a higher paying job within the period implemented by the indefinite alimony award. Consequently, the appellate court found that the proper remedy was in fact to grant the wife’s original request, as the evidence clearly pointed toward that conclusion.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information
To learn more about the various kinds of alimony in Maryland, factors leading to alimony, alimony modification, alimony within settlement agreements, or any other related family law topic, contact the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-1187.
