Dykman v. Dykman
Facts
The parties were divorcing; appellant was an eighty-five-year-old doctor of psychology, and appellee was a fifty-two-year-old psychiatrist. Appellee had earned substantial income while working for a consulting firm and turned over much of it to appellant, up to $12,000 per month, with the understanding that it would be used for marital purposes such as reducing debt on jointly owned property. Instead, there was evidence that appellant diverted marital funds to women with whom he was pursuing relationships, including gifts, automobiles, and large checks, and he also forged appellee's signature on a second mortgage and on tax returns. Appellee had suffered a vocal impairment that limited her ability to practice psychiatry, had no current income, and was trying to establish a practice while facing bankruptcy.
Issue
May a court properly award alimony to a spouse despite the payor spouse's advanced age when the payor is still able to pay and has engaged in financial misconduct that meaningfully relates to the recipient spouse's need? More specifically, could the chancellor consider appellant's diversion of marital funds in assessing appellee's need for alimony?
Rule
An award of alimony lies within the sound discretion of the chancellor and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. The primary factors are the need of one spouse and the ability of the other spouse to pay. Fault or marital misconduct ordinarily is not considered, but misconduct may be considered when it meaningfully relates to the recipient's need or the payor's ability to pay.
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
- The court's holding and reasoning
- Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
- 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Test yourself
If Eli appeals an alimony award arguing only that the trial judge gave too much weight to sympathy for Nora, which rationale best supports affirmance?