Opinion ID: 1912041
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Procedural Argument.

Text: The trustees complain that the district court abused its discretion by failing to allow them an opportunity to review and respond to Mary Jane's financial affidavit furnished in support of her application for a spousal allowance. Her application was filed on August 14, 2006. The trustees filed a resistance on August 16, complaining that they lacked sufficient information regarding Mary Jane's needs and request[ing] that an appropriate financial application be submitted to the court and the parties for review prior to the court's further consideration of this matter. Mary Jane responded and furnished an affidavit of financial status on August 28, 2006. The court's order for support was entered the same day, without allowing the trustees any additional time to analyze the financial affidavit. We find no merit in the trustees' procedural complaint. Section 633.374 does not require that a financial affidavit be filed prior to the court's award of spousal allowance, and none of our cases suggest it. In fact, a showing of necessity is not a prerequisite for receiving a spousal allowance. Spurgeon, 572 N.W.2d at 599; In re Estate of DeVries, 203 N.W.2d 308, 311 (Iowa 1972). A separate statute, Iowa Code section 633.375; provides for review of an award made under section 633.374: The court may, upon the petition of the spouse, or other person interested, and after hearing pursuant to notice to all interested parties, review such allowance and increase or decrease the same. This section requires notice and hearing, and presumably the presentation of financial information, because it allows for increasing or decreasing the award. However, it is clear from a reading of this section that it applies only after the fact, i.e., only after the award has been made. Moreover, the trustees have not attempted to use section 633.375 to challenge the amount of the allowance. The trustees understandably do not claim the spousal allowance of $36,000 (in an estate of approximately $1.7 million) is excessive, and we do not address that question. The district court correctly subjected the trust assets to payment of the spousal allowance award, and we therefore affirm. AFFIRMED.