Forristall v. Forristall
63 O.B.A.J. 1954, 1992 OK CIV APP 64, 831 P.2d 1017 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a divorce occurs shortly after one spouse obtains a professional degree that the other spouse financially supported, the supporting spouse is entitled to restitutionary alimony to prevent the unjust enrichment of the degreed spouse.
Facts:
- The parties, Wife and Husband, were married in August 1980.
- At the time of the marriage, Husband had been admitted to medical school and Wife was employed.
- Throughout the marriage, Wife worked and provided financial support while Husband completed his medical degree and residency in orthopedic surgery.
- The parties incurred significant student loan debt to finance Husband's medical education, which they intended to be a joint goal.
- Husband began his medical practice in July 1989.
- The parties separated in June 1990, less than one year after Husband started his career.
Procedural Posture:
- The parties filed for divorce in an Oklahoma state trial court.
- The trial court granted the divorce, divided the marital assets and debts, and awarded Wife $12,000 in support alimony.
- The trial court did not award Wife 'restitutionary alimony' for her contributions to Husband's medical education.
- The trial court ordered Husband to pay a portion of Wife's attorney fees.
- Wife, as Appellant, appealed to the Oklahoma Court of Appeals, challenging the amount of support alimony and the failure to award restitutionary alimony.
- Husband, as Appellee, filed a counter-appeal challenging the trial court's order requiring him to pay Wife's attorney fees.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a spouse who financially supported their partner's professional education, only for the marriage to end at the threshold of the partner's new career, have an equitable right to 'restitutionary alimony' as compensation for their investment?
Opinions:
Majority - Adams, Judge
Yes. When a divorce occurs at the threshold of a professional's career, preventing the other spouse from enjoying any benefit from their joint investment in that career, equity requires an award of restitutionary alimony to prevent the unjust enrichment of the professional spouse. The court, citing Hubbard v. Hubbard, found that the wife made a significant financial investment in the husband's medical degree, which was a joint goal of the marriage. Because the parties separated shortly after he began his practice, the wife was deprived of the anticipated rewards of her investment. The evidence showed she contributed nearly twice as much in earnings as the husband during his medical school years. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion by failing to award restitutionary alimony. The court also held that student loans taken out for the husband's education were marital debts and that the wife was entitled to increased support alimony to pursue her own educational goals.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms and applies the doctrine of restitutionary alimony established in Hubbard v. Hubbard, making it a mandatory remedy rather than a discretionary one in cases where a supporting spouse's investment is cut short by divorce. It clarifies that contributions are to be measured directly and that shared resources like student loans or family gifts should be credited equally to both parties. The ruling solidifies the principle that while a professional degree is not divisible property, the financial contribution towards it is a recognizable investment that equity demands be returned upon the dissolution of the marriage shortly after its attainment.
