In re Estate of Carlisle

Supreme Court of Iowa · 2002 · Family Law

Family LawSeparate MaintenanceSurviving Spouse RightsProbateseparate maintenancesurviving spouseelective sharehomestead

Facts

After sixty-five years of marriage, Dorthy Carlisle moved out of the marital home following a dispute with Francis Carlisle over modifications needed for her disability and filed for legal separation and maintenance. Francis counterclaimed for dissolution, but the district court entered a decree of separate maintenance, expressly stating there had not been a breakdown of the marital relationship sufficient to destroy the legitimate objects of matrimony. Under Iowa Code section 598.21(1), the court divided the parties' property, including their home and land, and stated each party would keep property in his or her possession free of claims by the other. After Francis later died leaving a will that intentionally excluded Dorthy, the estate sought a declaratory ruling on whether Dorthy still had rights as a surviving spouse under chapter 633.

Issue

Does a decree of separate maintenance, combined with Iowa Code sections 598.20 and 598.28, extinguish a spouse's status and rights as a surviving spouse under Iowa Code chapter 633? More specifically, does section 598.20's forfeiture of marital rights upon dissolution apply to separate-maintenance decrees through section 598.28?

Rule

Iowa Code section 598.20 forfeits marital rights only when a dissolution of marriage is decreed and does not apply to separate-maintenance actions through section 598.28. Section 598.28 makes applicable to separate-maintenance actions those provisions of chapter 598 that are applicable in that context, but not substantive dissolution-specific provisions that are inconsistent with the nature of separate maintenance.

🔒

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.

Nina Porter and Leon Porter, longtime residents of Cedar Rapids, obtained a decree of separate maintenance after the court found their marriage had not broken down irretrievably. The decree divided their property and stated each would retain assets in his or her possession free of claims by the other. A year later, Leon died with a will leaving everything to his brother through Prairie Lantern Holdings, a closely held family company.

Under the majority rule, which is the best answer regarding Nina's status in Leon's probate estate?

Explanation. The majority held that a decree of separate maintenance does not extinguish surviving-spouse rights under chapter 633. Section 598.20 applies only when a dissolution of marriage is decreed, and section 598.28 does not transform that dissolution-specific forfeiture rule into one governing separate maintenance. Thus, even after property division in separate maintenance, the spouse remains a surviving spouse for probate purposes.