One common issue couples going through a divorce will dispute over is alimony. One spouse may feel they should not have to pay anything, while the other spouse may disagree. With the decision being left up to the court, chances are that one spouse will be unhappy with the results. Even though there are certain things that are examined when deciding how much a former spouse will receive monthly in alimony, the amount decided upon may not always seems like a fair payment to the paying spouse.
A Nebraska man has recently experienced what it is like to have the courts decide in favor of his former spouse, awarding her an amount in alimony that he feels is a bit too high. The court awarded his ex-wife $3,200 a month in alimony, but the man makes less than what he has been ordered to pay. This means not only will all of his income be going to his ex-wife, but he will have to make up the difference as well.
This amount is seen unfair by the man because he does not make that much per month, which is why he appealed this decision because he claims such a high amount in alimony puts him into poverty. His appeal was denied because the two have no minor children. In some cases, alimony may not be an option if there is a child involved and it would drive one parent below the poverty threshold. This did not apply to the Nebraska man’s situation. There was also a record showing that his land has a value of $500,000, so he will have to find a way to make the payments to his ex-wife and that may mean selling his land.
According to the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines, a parent cannot be ordered to pay alimony if they have a minor child because making such payments may put them in poverty. Anyone experiencing a dispute over alimony may want to contact a divorce attorney, as they are familiar with these types of cases and may be able to help one spouse avoid having to make alimony payments or help a spouse with being awarded payments.
Source: Omaha Metro, “Retired farmer must pay more in alimony than monthly income, Nebraska Supreme Court rules,” Joe Duggan, June 29, 2015