Ellis v. Ellis

Nebraska Court of Appeals · 2020 · Family Law

Family LawAlimony ModificationDiscoveryalimonymodificationconsent decreeproperty settlement agreementgross inequity

Facts

The parties' dissolution decree incorporated a property settlement agreement requiring Phillip to pay Jennifer $1,200 per month in alimony for 9 years. After the divorce, Jennifer, who had not worked during the marriage and was believed at the time of dissolution to be unable to work because of a medical condition, obtained part-time and then full-time employment and also received investment and passive income. Phillip claimed his income had decreased after leaving prior employment and becoming a part owner of Hydro, but the evidence showed he received substantial fringe benefits and there was testimony that his actual income was higher than reported. Phillip sought to reduce alimony and to compel additional discovery about Jennifer's finances.

Issue

Did the district court abuse its discretion by refusing to modify Phillip's alimony obligation under a consent decree after Jennifer's income increased and Phillip claimed his income decreased? Did the district court abuse its discretion by partially denying Phillip's motion to compel discovery?

Rule

Alimony may be modified for good cause shown, and good cause means a material and substantial change in circumstances. But when alimony is set by a property settlement agreement incorporated into a consent decree, the decree is accorded greater force than an ordinary judgment and ordinarily will not be modified over a party's objection absent fraud or gross inequity. Discovery rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Lincoln, Nebraska, Dana Mercer and Olivia Mercer divorced after signing a property settlement agreement that was incorporated into the decree. Dana agreed to pay alimony for seven years. Two years later, Olivia objects to Dana’s request to reduce alimony, and Dana argues only that Olivia now earns more money and that his own finances are tighter than expected.

Which standard should the court apply to Dana’s request to modify alimony over Olivia’s objection?

Explanation. When alimony is set by a property settlement agreement incorporated into a consent decree, the decree is accorded greater force than an ordinary judgment and ordinarily will not be modified over a party’s objection absent fraud or gross inequity. Although alimony modification generally refers to good cause and a material and substantial change, the majority opinion treated the consent-decree setting as narrowing the inquiry to fraud or gross inequity. (Derived from Ellis v. Ellis (n.d.).)