Court Opinion

ID: 9782489
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 18:52:22.457963+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:35:03.285458
License: Public Domain

DURHAM, Chief Justice,
concurring:
€ 39 After this court's decision in Martinez v. Martinez, 818 P.2d 538 (Utah 1991), the legislature significantly amended the statutes related to alimony in divorcee cases. Subsection 30-3-5(8)(a) (2007) of the Utah Code now provides that a court "shall consider ... the following factors in determining alimony: ... (vil) whether the recipient spouse directly contributed to any increase in the payor spouse's skill by paying for education received by the payor spouse or allowing the payor spouse to attend school during the marriage."
40 Thus, in keeping with other developments in the understanding of support, see American Law Institute, Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations §§ 5.04 emt. b-d, 5.12 (2002), our legislature has acknowledged an *256expanded function for alimony as "support plus compensation" in appropriate cireum-stances. Proper attention to this aspect of alimony as set forth in the statute would, in my view, eliminate or decrease the need for reliance on quasi-contract theories of recovery. Therefore, although I concur with the majority, I would urge trial courts and counsel to consult the statutory basis for recovery in these types of cases.
T 41 Justice PARRISH and Justice NEHRING concur in Chief Justice DURHAM's concurring opinion.