Supreme Court upholds Agreement terminating alimony upon showing of cohabitation
The following article was written by Callagy Law’s Legal Team, and will focus on many common questions and concerns surrounding new developments, legal matters, and other procedures within the practice area of Family Law. Our mission is to answer any questions and give knowledge to many different aspects of these matters.
In the recently published opinion Quinn v. Quinn (A-5-14, decided May 3, 2016), the Supreme Court upheld the parties’ divorce settlement agreement which provided for a termination of alimony upon cohabitation. The majority’s decision is not surprising given the strong public policy favoring agreements and, absent a showing of fraud, coercion or overreaching, agreements will be enforced as written. The wrinkle in the dispute was that, absent the parties’ agreement calling for an outright termination of alimony upon cohabitation, cohabitation may not have resulted in a termination of the obligation and the court would have had the discretion to modify or suspend the obligation. In fact, the trial court in Quinn v. Quinn did suspend the alimony obligation for the period of cohabitation, rather than terminating the obligation in total, reinstating the obligation as of the date the cohabitation ended. The trial court’s decision was affirmed on appeal, but the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the trial court was bound to enforce the parties’ agreement, which was entered freely, voluntarily and with the advice of independent counsel. By failing to enforce the terms of the agreement, the trial court effectively created a different agreement not contemplated or intended by either party.
Two (2) of the Supreme Court Justices dissented noting the severe financial consequences to Ms. Quinn as a result of the termination of the alimony obligation. The dissent believed that the provision of the parties’ agreement mandating a termination of alimony upon cohabitation is contrary to public policy and would effectively “pauperize” the ex-wife. The dissent cites a lack of evidence of any financial or economic benefit received by the ex-wife as a result of the cohabitation. The dissent viewed the anti-cohabitation provision in the parties’ agreement “as a means to oppress an ex-spouse,” viewing the provision as requiring the ex-wife to choose between her right to alimony and her “desire to enter into a loving relationship.”
The majority opinion, in addressing the dissents concern regarding the economic consequences, acknowledged the “serious” financial consequences to the ex-wife resulting from the termination of alimony. However, the majority clearly felt that the ex-wife understood without doubt that her conduct could result in a termination of the alimony obligation, yet she proceeded to cohabit anyway. Interestingly, Ms. Quinn stopped cohabitating just after her ex-husband sought to terminate the alimony obligation. Yet, the majority found that the cessation of cohabitation was of no moment and irrelevant. Will this open the door for similar applications to terminate or modify alimony obligations based upon cohabitation that existed months or maybe even years earlier, but subsequently ended?
The Quinn v. Quinn decision exemplifies the clash of equities often experienced in family law disputes. Certainly Mr. Quinn believes that enforcement of the bargained for agreement was equitable and the majority of the Supreme Court agreed. If nothing else, the Quinn decision should serve as a reminder that notions of equity and fairness are subject to judicial interpretation.
The Team at Callagy Law hopes the information in this article was helpful in either your personal or professional life.. Callagy Law, is a multidisciplinary law firm, headquartered in Paramus, NJ owned and operated by Sean Callagy. We are committed to providing legal representation and advice to our clients at additional law offices located across the United States. Please note that the information posted here should not be used as a legal argument of defense. If you find yourself needing legal advice pertaining to your unique situation, you can contact us at here. Feel free to search us on Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn! Additionally you can subscribe to our daily videos on YouTube.
Learn More About Callagy Law Here:
