Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Alimony's Job Lock, Margaret Ryznar
Alimony's Job Lock, Margaret Ryznar
Akron Law Review
In family law, courts often prevent people who owe alimony from changing jobs. If a job change is accompanied by a salary decrease, the court will not necessarily readjust the alimony obligation and instead impute the higher income to the obligor. This Article introduces the term “job lock” to describe this situation, borrowing the term from the health care context, wherein job immobility due to health insurance concerns has received significant scrutiny. This Article draws similar attention to the alimony context, proposing a balancing test to assist courts interested in alleviating job lock under certain circumstances.
Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley
Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley
Akron Law Review
THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT, in Wiegand v. Wiegand,struck out at one of the true bastions of sex discrimination incorporated into the Anglo-American legal system. The legislated discrimination of the Pennsylvania Divorce Law was the object of the court's scrutiny. Appellee Sara Wiegand had filed a complaint in divorce a mensa et thora, a petition for alimony, and an initial petition for alimony pendente lite, counsel fees, and expenses. On August 14, 1967, the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, ordered appellant Myron Wiegand to pay $875 per month alimony pendente lite and $250 preliminary counsel fees. Subsequently, appellee filed additional …
Divorce And Alimony; Separation Agreements; Jurisdiction Of Court To Modify; Impairment Of Contract; Statutory Provisions; Wolfe V. Wolfe, John J. Lavin
Akron Law Review
WITH THE decision of Wolfe v. Wolfe 1 the Ohio Supreme Court joins the majority of American jurisdictions' which hold that where a court has the general power to modify a decree for alimony or support the exercise of that power is not affected by the fact that the decree is based on an agreement entered into by the parties to the action
Divorce And Alimony; Separation Agreements; Jurisdiction Of Court To Modify; Impairment Of Contract; Statutory Provisions; Wolfe V. Wolfe, John J. Lavin
Akron Law Review
WITH THE decision of Wolfe v. Wolfe the Ohio Supreme Court joins the majority of American jurisdictions' which hold that where a court has the general power to modify a decree for alimony or support the exercise of that power is not affected by the fact that the decree is based on an agreement entered into by the parties to the action.
A Professional Degree Is Not Marital Property Upon Divorce: Stevens V. Stevens, Katherine Scheid
A Professional Degree Is Not Marital Property Upon Divorce: Stevens V. Stevens, Katherine Scheid
Akron Law Review
This Note first analyzes the Stevens court's opinion and concludes that it fails to give sufficient direction on how to determine the amount of the alimony award in order to sufficiently compensate the supporting spouse. Second, this Note explores the ways in which courts in other jurisdictions have attempted to compensate the supporting spouse. Finally, this Note proposes two alternative methods of valuing the supporting spouse's contribution. One method applies if the court, as in Stevens v. Stevens, holds that contribution toward a technical degree is not divisible marital property but should be considered when awarding alimony. The second …
“Alimony For Your Eggs”: Fertility Compensation In Divorce Proceedings, Katelin Eastman
“Alimony For Your Eggs”: Fertility Compensation In Divorce Proceedings, Katelin Eastman
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment explores the history and reasoning behind divorce in the United States, examines contemporary alimony jurisprudence, and assesses the viability of fertility compensation in divorce proceedings, arguing that there is, in fact, a legal basis for awarding such reparation upon divorce. Part II surveys divorce at common law and details the impact of the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) and its introduction of no-fault divorce. Part III discusses alimony under New Jersey state law, with particular emphasis on reimbursement alimony after the Reiss trilogy, the Crews marital standard of living, and the impact of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) …