Court Opinion

ID: 9822124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 08:47:46.353268+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:14:17.852812
License: Public Domain

KAPSNER, Justice,
concurring in the result.
[¶ 20] The district court’s order states in its analysis of the Ruff-Fischer factors: “The Court finds that Barbara entered the marriage for purposes of financial gain and security.” And later, “As to spousal support, the Court finds some limited spousal support should be awarded as a result of this limited and short-term marriage. However, given Barbara’s intentions in seeking the marriage, she should, not suddenly find herself -with a better lifestyle than she was associated with at the time of the marriage.”
[¶ 21] ' If this were the entirety of the district court’s analysis, I would urge *46reversal. Taken alone,, this . language suggests the district court is punishing Barbara Degnan for considering future financial security as part of the decision to marry. Jane Austen would be . astounded. Perhaps at. twenty-five one enters marriage considering only love; one would be foolish to do so at fifty. Because the court also identified other factors to support its decision on property division, spousal-support, and attorney fees, I concur in, the result.
[¶ 22] CAROL RONNING KAPSNER