Be Mindful of The Language You Use In Your Divorce Settlement Agreement: Smith v. Thompson

Related Posts

Terminating Spousal Support

As previously discussed, there are only a few ways to terminate spousal support payments. One way is if your former spouse remarries or lives with another individual as if they were married for a year or more (see Section 20-109(D) of the Virginia Code).

But what if your marriage settlement agreement or court order requires you to make certain payments “in lieu of spousal support”? Can you automatically stop making these payments if your former spouse remarries?

The Smith v. Thompson Case

In Smith v. Thompson, the Virginia Court of Appeals faced this very issue. An ex-husband sought to terminate payments he had been making for the benefit of his ex-wife after she remarried. These payments were outlined in the couple’s property settlement agreement, which was incorporated into their divorce order. The agreement read:

IV. WAIVER OF RIGHT TO SUPPORT: In consideration of the other terms of this agreement, and whereas both spouses are fully self-supporting, both parties waive all right or claim which they may now have to receive support or maintenance from the other, subject to the below listed provisions. No court shall have jurisdiction to award spousal support at any time regardless of any circumstances that may arise, other [than] those expressly listed within this agreement.”

A. Husband acknowledges that he is presently liable to wife for the cost of child care and support in the amount of $200 a month up to and including (with final payment) July 1, 2009.
B. Wife agrees to waive receipt of spousal support in lieu of:

  1. Husband maintaining the cost of medical, dental, and auto insurance coverage for Wife and Minor Child, cost of all personal property taxes on the two vehicles currently owned by the parties, and monthly cost of maintenance and insurance of the Sprint cell phones for Wife and Minor Child.
  2. Husband will continue to maintain life insurance policies on Husband, naming Wife as beneficiary and in the event of Wife pre-deceasing Husband, beneficiary will be Minor Child.”

Arguments in Court

The ex-husband argued that these payments were essentially spousal support, and since his ex-wife had remarried, he no longer needed to make these payments. The ex-wife, however, contended that the payments were not spousal support, as their agreement clearly stated that she waived her right to alimony.

Court’s Decision

Despite the ex-wife’s argument, the Virginia Court of Appeals disagreed. The court concluded:

Although the agreement is titled ‘Waiver of Right to Support,’ it provides for support-related payments under the listed provisions. The language implies that payments made pursuant to these provisions do, in fact, constitute spousal support.

As a result, the court ruled that the husband’s payment obligations could be terminated due to the ex-wife’s remarriage.

Importance of Clear Language in Settlement Agreements

The Smith v. Thompson case underscores the importance of carefully drafting a property settlement agreement. Even if both parties initially understand the terms, ambiguous language can lead to disputes when one party seeks to modify or terminate the agreement later on.

Conclusion

The case also highlights the value of hiring a skilled family law attorney. An experienced attorney will ensure that the language in your divorce settlement or court order is precise and reflects your needs, helping to avoid unintended modifications in the future.

If you are considering divorce or negotiating a property settlement agreement, consult with an experienced family law attorney. The team at DiPietro Law Group can help protect your rights. Contact us today at (888) 530-4374 to schedule a consultation.