Court Opinion

ID: 9707561
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 02:15:45.009509+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:35.127406
License: Public Domain

Caporale, J.,
concurring.
I agree the alimony should be modified, but am of the opinion that the majority does not do enough.
Although the majority opinion acknowledges that there has been such a material change in circumstances as to constitute good cause to modify the husband’s alimony obligation, it nonetheless requires him to essentially pay the $73,840 originally ordered, but over a future period of almost 8y2 years instead of the approximately 21/£-year remainder of the original term. Thus, it gives the husband no long-term relief and keeps both parties in bondage to each other for a decade after their marriage was dissolved. While the husband must pay, the wife must forego remarriage or forfeit payment. I would have reduced the alimony payments to $80 per week (one-fourth of the husband’s net weekly pay) payable for the 132-week period of the original term remaining from and after September 7, 1982, terminable upon the wife’s remarriage or the husband’s death.
Grant, J., joins in this concurrence.