Case ID: or-app_94/html/0183-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted October 7,
    affirmed on appeal and reversed on cross-appeal November 23, 1988
    In the Matter of the Marriage of GILMORE, Respondent - Cross-Appellant, and GILMORE, Appellant - Cross-Respondent.
    
    (83-4508-NJ-3; CA A47600)
    764 P2d 622
    William G. Carter, Medford, argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant - cross-respondent.
    Thomas C. Howser, Ashland, argued the cause for respondent - cross-appellant. On the brief were Doug Engle and Howser & Munsell, Ashland.
    Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Husband appeals the denial of his motion to terminate spousal support and reduce child support. Wife cross-appeals the trial court’s termination of husband’s obligation to maintain a life insurance policy.

Husband contends that his error in valuing a commercial building before entry of the divorce judgment, his inability to sell the family home, his poor decisions regarding taxes and his inability to pay taxes since the judgment have created a substantial and unanticipated change in economic circumstances that would allow a modification of the judgment pursuant to ORS 107.135(2). Wife contends that there is no basis for modification of any portion of the judgment, including the life insurance payments.

On de novo review, we agree with the trial court that there has been no substantial change in circumstances. Each circumstance listed by husband existed or could have been anticipated before entry of the original judgment. Because there was no material change of circumstances, the trial court erred in modifying the judgment to eliminate husband’s obligation to maintain his life insurance policy.

Affirmed on appeal; reversed on cross-appeal; costs to wife.