Roberts v. Roberts
1984 N.C. App. LEXIS 3211, 314 S.E.2d 781, 68 N.C.App. 163 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When determining if a spouse is a "dependent spouse" who is "substantially in need of maintenance and support," a trial court must make specific findings of fact concerning the parties' standard of living, the supporting spouse's expenses, the length of the marriage, and each party's financial contributions.
Facts:
- Dewey Roberts and Avis Roberts were married on June 25, 1981, and initially lived with Avis's mother.
- The couple lived together off and on for several months, with Dewey Roberts periodically leaving to live in his own house.
- During these separations, Dewey Roberts lived with other women, Debra Proffitt or Barbara Travis, and refused to allow Avis Roberts to join him.
- On August 22, 1981, Dewey Roberts physically abused Avis Roberts by slapping her.
- On November 5, 1981, Dewey Roberts permanently abandoned Avis Roberts without justification.
- Avis Roberts is unemployed, without personal resources, and lives with her mother.
- Dewey Roberts is employed and earns $300 per week.
Procedural Posture:
- Dewey Roberts initiated a lawsuit against Avis Roberts in a North Carolina trial court.
- Avis Roberts filed a counterclaim seeking a divorce from bed and board, alimony, and attorney's fees based on allegations of indignities, abandonment, and adultery.
- The trial court found in favor of Avis Roberts, determining she was a dependent spouse and awarding her alimony and attorney's fees.
- Dewey Roberts, as appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Avis Roberts is the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Did the trial court err by failing to make specific factual findings regarding the plaintiff's expenses, the parties' accustomed standard of living, and the length of the marriage before concluding that the defendant was a dependent spouse entitled to alimony?
Opinions:
Majority - Johnson, Judge.
Yes, the trial court erred in its determination of dependency. To find that a spouse is 'substantially in need of maintenance and support,' the court must make specific factual findings sufficient to show it considered all relevant circumstances established in Williams v. Williams. In this case, the trial court's findings were deficient because it failed to make findings regarding the plaintiff's expenses, the standard of living to which the parties had become accustomed as a family unit, the length of the marriage, and the financial contributions of each party. While the trial court correctly found that Dewey's actions constituted indignities and abandonment, which are valid grounds for alimony, the determination of dependency and the amount of alimony must be vacated and remanded for a new hearing. The court also noted that Avis's testimony implying Dewey's adultery was inadmissible under G.S. 50-10, but this error was harmless as other grounds for the divorce from bed and board were sufficiently established.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the procedural requirements for trial courts in determining spousal dependency for alimony awards. It underscores that trial courts cannot make conclusory findings but must create a detailed factual record demonstrating consideration of all factors outlined in the controlling precedent, Williams v. Williams. This holding ensures that appellate courts can conduct meaningful review of alimony decisions and forces trial judges to articulate the specific basis for their conclusions. The decision clarifies that even for a very short marriage, the full analytical framework for determining dependency must be applied and documented.
