Opinion ID: 2067354
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Present Legislative Enactments

Text: There is nothing in the legislative history of § 3-6A-05 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article or Art. 16, §§ 1 through 5 to indicate that the General Assembly intended to abolish Maryland's traditional distinction between alimony and disposition of property, and to authorize equity courts, in the absence of an agreement between the parties, to award alimony in gross.
Maryland's Property Disposition in Divorce and Annulment Act (Property Disposition Act), Md.Code (1974, 1980 Repl.Vol., & 1983 Cum.Supp.) §§ 3-6A-01 through 3-6A-08 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article constitutes the initial phase of a comprehensive revision of Maryland's domestic relations law. It represents a new legislative approach to the rights and obligations associated with marriage and its dissolution. It embodies a significant modification of the property rights of spouses incidental to an absolute divorce by allowing equity courts to equitably distribute property acquired during the marriage and to grant a monetary award adjusting the interests of the spouses in such marital property. In determining the amount of such a monetary award, equity courts are required, in accordance with the announced policy of the General Assembly, to give careful consideration to both monetary and nonmonetary contributions of the spouses. Harper v. Harper, 294 Md. 54, 63, 448 A.2d 916, 920-21 (1982); Deering v. Deering, 292 Md. 115, 117, 437 A.2d 883, 884 (1981); Pitsenberger v. Pitsenberger, 287 Md. 20, 24-25, 410 A.2d 1052, 1052, 1055 (1980); Wimmer, 287 Md. at 667 n. 2, 414 A.2d at 1257 n. 2. The Property Disposition Act was proposed by The Governor's Commission on Domestic Relations Laws (Commission). In its Report Accompanying the Commission's Proposed Bill on the Disposition of Property in Connection with a Divorce or Annulment, the Commission repeatedly indicated that the Property Disposition Act was intended to deal with the disposition of property and not with the subject of alimony, maintenance or spousal support. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 1, 14, 18 (1978). [22] Thus, in a prefatory statement, the Commission said: The Governor's Commission on Domestic Relations Laws was established by Governor Marvin Mandel on February 27, 1976. He defined the scope of its responsibilities as being `to undertake a complete study of the constitutional, statutory, and common law concerning domestic relations, including the laws concerning marriage, the dissolution of marriage, the rights and obligations attendant upon or accruing from each, and the procedures for resolving and adjudicating domestic disputes.' After a series of meetings described in the Chairman's letter to the Acting Governor under date of January 9, 1978, in which the Commission detailed the tasks before it and considered their respective priority and urgency of accomplishment, it turned its attention to the subject matter which it considered to be most urgent of review: the disposition of property upon the dissolution or annulment of marriage. The Commission proposes to deal separately with the subject of alimony, maintenance, or spousal support, with which the subject at hand is of course closely related. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 1 (1978) (emphasis added). According to the Commission, the Property Disposition Act was designed to cure the perceived existing inequity in present Maryland law governing the disposition of real and personal property upon divorce or annulment. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 2 (1978). The Commission, recognizing that non-monetary contributions within a marriage are real, stated as its purpose that such nonmonetary contributions should be recognized in the event that the marriage is dissolved or annulled. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 3 (1978). The Commission then concluded: [W]hat was needed in fact was a definition of the rights of the parties, in the disposition of property upon divorce or annulment, which would correct those inequities that uncorrected historical development of the law had wrought, and which would comport with what the Commission perceives as a reasonable and workable system of such property disposition for the people of this State. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 14 (1978). More particularly, the Commission said that the Property Disposition Act does relate, as its Title indicates, only to the disposition of property between spouses....  Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 17 (1978) (emphasis added). Finally, in response to objections that the Property Disposition Act related only to property rights in divorce actions and did not propose changes in the law relating to other subjects such as alimony, the Commission said: [T]he fact is that other subjects within the scope of the Commission's charter, such as alimony and grounds for divorce, are related to the legal provisions relating to the disposition of property  and that whatever action the General Assembly takes regarding the subject of this [Act] ... will strongly influence the action ... which the General Assembly may take, with respect to those related subjects. It seems clear that the question of property disposition is central to any general revision of the divorce and annulment law of this State, and that we had better get on with settling the law on that subject so that we may move ahead with a concomitant adjustment in law on related subjects.  Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 18 (1978) (emphasis added). Thus, the Commission indicated in a variety of ways that the purpose of the Property Disposition Act was to provide for a fair and equitable distribution of property. It was not intended to alter Maryland's traditional concept of alimony or to authorize the award of alimony in gross. The General Assembly's awareness that the scope of the Property Disposition Act was restricted to the disposition of property is equally manifest. The stated purpose of the Property Disposition Act is to grant equity courts the authority to make monetary awards and provide for the disposition and use of property under certain circumstances in conjunction with a divorce.... [23] Ch. 794 of the Acts of 1978, effective 1 January 1979. The Property Disposition Act's preamble reads in pertinent part: [I]t is the policy of this State that when a marriage is dissolved the property interests of the spouses should be adjusted fairly and equitably, with careful consideration being given to both monetary and nonmonetary contributions made by the respective spouses to the well-being of the family.... Ch. 794 of the Acts of 1978, preamble. [24] (emphasis added). Subtitle 6A of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article is entitled Property Disposition in Divorce and Annulment. [25] The Property Disposition Act itself embodies a statutory scheme whose parts are logically organized to deal with the disposition of property upon the dissolution of a marriage. [26] Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 15 (1978). Section 3-6A-01 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article defines three types of property  new to Maryland's Domestic Relations Law  family home, family use personal property, and marital property. Section 3-6A-03 describes the authority of equity courts with respect to personal property and family use personal property. Section 3-6A-04 describes the authority of equity courts with respect to real property. Section 3-6A-05 describes the authority of equity courts with respect to marital property and the adjustment of the parties' rights and equities concerning that property. Indeed, that section authorizes equity courts to grant a monetary award, whether or not alimony is awarded, and requires equity courts to consider the amount of any award of alimony in determining the amount of the monetary award. Moreover, that section enables a monetary award to be reduced to judgment to the extent that any part of the award is due and owing. Section 3-6A-06 describes the authority of equity courts with respect to the family home. Section 3-6A-08 provides for enforcement in accordance with the Maryland Rules of any type of property disposition award. Thus, the legislative history of the Property Disposition Act, the language of that Act when read in context and in relation to all of its provisions, and its stated purpose overwhelmingly establish a legislative intent to restrict the scope of the Property Disposition Act to the disposition of property acquired before and during the marriage. It was not intended to alter Maryland's traditional concept of alimony or to authorize the award of alimony in gross.
Maryland's 1980 Alimony Act (1980 Alimony Act), Md. Code (1957, 1981 Repl.Vol.), Art. 16, §§ 1 through 5, constitutes the second phase of a comprehensive revision of Maryland's domestic relations law. It represents a new legislative approach to the rights and obligations associated with a form of spousal support  alimony. The 1980 Alimony Act embodies a significant modification of the previous right to alimony for an indefinite period terminable upon the death of either spouse or the marriage of the recipient spouse. It allows equity courts to award alimony for a definite period of time after considering, among other things, both the monetary and nonmonetary contribution of the spouses, and any monetary award granted pursuant to § 3-6A-05 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article. The 1980 Alimony Act was proposed by The Governor's Commission on Domestic Relations Laws. In its Report on a Proposed Bill Relating to Alimony ..., the Commission repeatedly indicated that the 1980 Alimony Act was intended to deal with the subject of alimony and not with property disposition. Thus, the Commission said: Early in its deliberations the Commission decided that, while the question of the division of property at the time of divorce was the most pressing problem before it, the question of alimony was a rather close second.  The matter of property division has been resolved, at least for the present, by the enactment of Ch. 794, Acts of 1978 (Subtitle 6A, Article on `Courts and Judicial Proceedings'). Now, the accompanying proposed Bill embodies the legislative recommendations which the Commission believes should be enacted into law on the subject of alimony.  Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 1 (1980) (emphasis added). All of the questions considered by the Commission centered upon various aspects of alimony. Of prime importance was the duration of time for which alimony should be required. The Commission determined that the purpose of alimony was to provide an economic means for both parties to deal with their new unmarried life on their own, or put another way, to provide an opportunity for the recipient party to become self-supporting. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 2 (1980). Indeed, the Commission recognized that the purpose of an award of alimony at the time of divorce is not to provide a lifetime pension, but to facilitate a transition for the parties from the joint married state to the separate single one, where this is practicable. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 4 (1980). The Commission recommended that [t]he award of alimony in the ordinary case should be for a specific time, and that time should be stated in the Order or Decree.... Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 4 (1980). Other questions relating to alimony considered by the Commission included modification of the doctrine of recrimination, reimbursability of costs already expended, participation of the State in the collection of arrearages, and award of judgment for attorney's fees. Report of the Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 7 (1980). Thus, the Commission in various ways indicated that the purpose of the 1980 Alimony Act was to provide the fairest possible outcome of the alimony problem for most divorcing parties in this State. Report of The Governor's Comm'n on Domestic Relations Laws, at 2 (1980). The General Assembly's awareness that the scope of the 1980 Alimony Act was restricted to alimony is equally manifest. The 1980 Alimony Act was passed for the purpose of defining, consolidating and establishing the law with respect to alimony; establishing uniform procedures for enforcing alimony obligations; clarifying language, resolving conflicts, and defining certain terms; and relating generally to alimony. Ch. 575 of the Acts of 1980, effective 1 July 1980. The subtitle of Art. 16, §§ 1 through 5 is Alimony. The 1980 Alimony Act itself embodies a statutory scheme whose parts are logically organized to deal with alimony upon the dissolution of a marriage. Article 16, § 1 describes the authority of equity courts to award alimony and enumerates the factors to be considered in determining the amount of the award and the period of its duration. Indeed, that section requires equity courts to consider any monetary award granted pursuant to § 3-6A-05 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article in determining the amount of alimony. Article 16, § 2 authorizes equity courts to order that alimony payments be made to a designated government agency or trustee. Article 16, § 3 describes the authority of equity courts to order the payment of necessary and reasonable expenses incurred in any proceeding to enforce an alimony award. Article 16, § 4 describes the authority of equity courts to award alimony against nonresident defendants. Article 16, § 5 describes the authority of equity courts to modify or terminate alimony awards. Thus, the legislative history of the 1980 Alimony Act, the language of that Act when read in context and in relation to all of its provisions and its stated purpose overwhelmingly establish a legislative intent to restrict the scope of the 1980 Alimony Act to alimony. It was not intended to alter Maryland's traditional distinction between alimony and disposition of property, or to authorize the award of alimony in gross.