Opinion ID: 1228809
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Effect of remarriage on spousal support

Text: We turn now to the second question upon which we requested argument: whether spousal support awards should routinely provide that the support payments will terminate upon the remarriage of the supported spouse. We hold that they should not. The only statute which is relevant is that which gives the court the authority to set aside, alter, or modify the support portion of the decree upon motion of either party. ORS 107.135(1)(a). That authority may be exercised when a substantial change in circumstances since the original decree has been shown. [10] There is no statutory provision for automatic termination of spousal support under any circumstances. In other jurisdictions where the matter is not governed by statute, there is a division of authority over whether remarriage of the supported spouse automatically terminates the support obligation or is simply a change in circumstances which may justify such a termination upon proper application to the court. See Annot., Alimony as Affected by Wife's Remarriage, In Absence of Controlling Specific Statute, 48 ALR2d 270 (1956). We have consistently taken the latter position. Nelson v. Nelson, 181 Or. 494, 499, 182 P.2d 416 (1947); Phy v. Phy, 116 Or. 31, 36, 236 P. 751, 240 P. 237 (1925); Brandt v. Brandt, 40 Or. 477, 487, 67 P. 508 (1902). Although this court has expressed the opinion that it was against public policy to permit a woman to look for her support to two different men, [11] that policy has never been held in this state to operate automatically without regard to the particular circumstances. The cases announcing the position that it does not were decided at a time when the husband was considered to have an absolute unilateral obligation to support his wife. We would not now hold otherwise, when legal duties of spousal support are mutual. [12] Public policy does not require that a woman whose first marriage has been dissolved be free to remarry only if her new husband is able to support her. If remarriage by the supported spouse is not, as a matter of law, grounds for automatic termination of spousal support, we cannot approve the general practice of inserting provisions to that effect in support decrees as a matter of routine. Unless there is reason, at the time the decree is entered, to predict a remarriage which will substantially change the circumstances relevant to the support award, the question of the effect of remarriage upon a support decree should await the event and proper application for modification of the decree. As we said, in another context, in Picker v. Vollenhover, 206 Or. 45, 72, 290 P.2d 789, 801 (1955):    At the time of divorce the court should not lay down rules for the future whose propriety would depend on circumstances materially different from those shown by the evidence and which can not reasonably be predicted from the evidence. In particular, it should not in the original decree provide for future changes in the quantum of support based on the single criterion of the change in the amount of earnings of the defendant. The original decree retains its vitality unless and until the court on proper showing finds that on all of the evidence presented a change in support is required. A provision [for changes in the amount of child support based on a sliding scale tied to defendant's future earnings] is not only based on speculation as to future events,  it is also based on the assumption that a change in one only of the many circumstances which may be relevant to the issue shall be conclusive. These considerations, stated above with reference to child support decrees, apply with equal force to awards of spousal support. We hold, then, that it is improper for the dissolution decree to provide in advance for automatic termination of spousal support upon remarriage of the supported spouse unless there is some reason disclosed by the evidence for such a provision in the specific case. [12a]