This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat.
Respondent seeks attorney fees and costs on appeal.
Because we hold the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's motion for a downward modification of spousal maintenance and awarding respondent attorney fees, we affirm. His annual income has fluctuated throughout his career. Due to these fluctuations, the trial court determined appellant's annual income, for purposes of the dissolution decree, by averaging his annual income from 1990 to 1995. Respondent has a varied employment history. Appellant appealed the dissolution judgment and decree on numerous grounds, including the trial court's method of calculating spousal maintenance.