under three dollars into the in two thousand and eleven money and coincidentally that's a little to the dollar with the husband is making out he has he's now receiving three separate engines associated with his previous employment not only including retired military pay but also retired pay associated with him being the president of lambert international airport and social security and those three equal about eleven thousand one hundred dollars a month going back to nine hundred seventy five with the difficulties of a forty year old woman with a high school education very little work experience trying to get a job and trying to support herself in addition to the six hundred fifty dollars a month that she had was receiving at employ and i detail her work history how she felt several jobs one of them for a significant period of time in her later years seven years i believe it was from one nine hundred ninety three to two thousand and one of the things he's  consider a number of factors but doesn't really hide any of them in particular to amount versus duration and in this particular case i believe we're relying too much on an issue that while that factor is more significant with respect to duration than amount it was used as part of the basis for saying i'm not going to increase the amount of maintenance in this particular matter some of the factors to eleven thousand one hundred dollars which is now then what you're looking at is an equal amount or if what husbands made in other words he's making about the same amount of dollars at my current in two thousand and eleven th ninety seven and nine hundred ninety nine she wouldn't boot been able to even make significant payments on the war going to her house and that's the only real asset that she has if you look at the financial statement that was filed in this matter he has no other assets of any significance compare that to the husband's financial state and he isn't he has and i think i put this in the brief he has about forty six hundred forty seven dollars left over after paying all the household expenses for both he and his look at the destitution that the wife is now on her with respect to the husband circumstances one of the pieces that should some light on the issue of the military and she talked about that for just a moment  receiving his military and two years later when he retired in one nine hundred seventy seven within two years after the divorce and that brings up a core legal issue and that is we're talking about a situation where the husband had been on duty for twenty one years and he was a current at the time course he retires no six he was not promoted beyond time after the after the judgement of this loser and when you look to the fact that the smith case said you're supposed to take that into so that you get a feel label of what it is that we're talking about this for us is the standard of living today versus and that is part of what was argued on trial is one of the things that the husband talks about is deflect the real issue and the question about well but he may have some future medical needs well that's all they can do and i think the case law says that the determination is not not supposed to be based on pure speculation as to what through the future on current husband as far as expenses that he might have associated with medical leave and this is the backdrop of the fact that he's a military parent and all his medical expenses are paid for by the by the government but from becoming self supporting my client is eighty years old and he is and he is suffering from serious medical condition in fact during these proceedings he didn't have to undergo cervical spine surgery which put him in a read the bills patien that's with these policies so there's no way to really know what the policies were there no but there was no nothing in the record that's going to show identify a policy by its number not the time  admitted that he said he thought he knew what the policies were the two letters cite incidents that surrounded the time of the divorce it specifically refers to what had just happened at the time of well what do you think is required by that court order is he supposed to life insurance is not a file property it's not in support of maintenance because the case law that i put in the three sets a means to reason pointed out so why do you have life insurance to support it so i submit that the life insurance is not modifying the property and as a result that means that husband was responsible for what was the dollar on that was in the policies where the terms of the life life insurance policies that were would be trying to just lose him they were the bearer of the foreign policies in effect a couple of them everybody knew everybody he was going to be retiring from the military order when he had been on duty for twenty one years was a colonel and had just about gone as far as good and in fact retired within two years remarrie