R.S. v. B.L., 6/22/17
November 5, 2017
The trial court acted within its discretion by awarding the wife declining maintenance for eight years. The court considered the wife’s imputed income because she had an Ivy-League education, maintained her law license, continued to engage in professional activities, did consulting work, and was appointed as an arbitrator to provide her with $ 35,000 of taxable income per month. The trial court providently exercised its discretion in applying a combined income cap of $ 350,000 based on the children’s actual needs rather than the husband’s income. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in using a valuation date of September 30, 2013, the date the trial ended, under the circumstances of the case. The lower court’s ruling was affirmed.
