Jul 19, 2013 - before the opinion i s printed i n Southern Reporter. ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS. SPECIAL TERM, 2013.
REL:
07/19/2013
Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r .
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2013
2111194
Nancy W. Blount v. W i l l i a m B. Blount Appeal from Montgomery C i r c u i t Court (DR-97-28.04 and DR-97-28.05) THOMAS, J u d g e . Nancy W. B l o u n t
("the f o r m e r w i f e " ) a n d W i l l i a m B. B l o u n t
("the f o r m e r husband") were d i v o r c e d b y t h e Montgomery C i r c u i t Court
i n 1998.
Among o t h e r
things
not pertinent to this
a p p e a l , t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d was o r d e r e d t o p a y p e r i o d i c a l i m o n y
2111194 in
the monthly
modified
amount o f $ 4 , 0 0 0 .
several
The
at a l l
t i m e s remained o b l i g a t e d t o pay a l i m o n y i n the monthly
amount
It
I n May
i s undisputed
partial January
the
former
was
husband
of $ 4 , 0 0 0 .
t i m e s ; however,
d i v o r c e judgment
2010,
t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d was
that
the
former
husband
incarcerated.
began
a l i m o n y payment o f $ 2 , 0 0 0 p e r month i n June 2010. 26,
2011,
the
former
wife
filed
a petition
c i r c u i t c o u r t s e e k i n g an o r d e r o f c o n t e m p t b e c a u s e husband had " f a i l e d the
paying
former
or r e f u s e d " t o pay a l i m o n y .
h u s b a n d was
i n arrears
($2,000 p e r month f o r 8 m o n t h s ) . husband f i l e d
a On
i n the
the
former
At that
time
i n t h e amount o f $ 1 6 , 0 0 0
On June 27, 2011, t h e f o r m e r
an answer t o t h e f o r m e r w i f e ' s p e t i t i o n
and
a
c o u n t e r p e t i t i o n f o r a m o d i f i c a t i o n , s e e k i n g the t e r m i n a t i o n of his
alimony o b l i g a t i o n because,
pay
alimony
i n any
amount.
A
he a l l e g e d , he was c o n t e m p t h e a r i n g was
November 28, 2011; t h e j u d g m e n t was e n t e r e d on A p r i l The
circuit
unable to
c o u r t found the
held 25,
on
2012.
former husband i n contempt
for
his failure
t o p a y $4,000 p e r month i n a l i m o n y ; h o w e v e r ,
it
suspended
the
former
husband's
alimony
obligation
r e t r o a c t i v e t o J u l y 2011, w h i c h was t h e month a f t e r t h e f o r m e r husband f i l e d
his counterpetition
2
for a modification
of h i s
2111194 alimony o b l i g a t i o n .
However, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e j u d g m e n t ,
1
the
amount o f $4,000 p e r month i n a l i m o n y w o u l d c o n t i n u e t o a c c r u e and t h e f u l l was
amount w o u l d become due when t h e f o r m e r
released
from
prison
and
employed.
The
husband
circuit
court
f o u n d t h a t t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d h a d p a i d t h e f o r m e r w i f e $10,000 from
2011
($2,000
months) and t h a t t h e p a r t i e s
had
stipulated
husband
an a r r e a r a g e o f $ 3 6 , 0 0 0 ,
was
July
was
2011
to
November
o b l i g a t e d t o pay
per
month
for 5
that the
former
"$2,000 p e r month f o r e a c h month f r o m June
November 2011"
($2,000 p e r month f o r 18 m o n t h s ) .
court
calculated
total
award On
alter,
May
interest
of $38,920.12. 3,
2012,
the
2010
through
The
circuit
i n t h e amount o f $2,920.12
for a
2
former
husband
amend, o r v a c a t e t h e c i r c u i t
other t h i n g s not p e r t i n e n t t o t h i s a l l e g e d t h a t he had
which
filed
a motion
to
c o u r t ' s judgment.
Among
appeal, the former
husband
c o n t i n u e d t o pay
the former w i f e
$2,000
If a trial c o u r t m o d i f i e s o r t e r m i n a t e s an a l i m o n y o b l i g a t i o n , i t has t h e d i s c r e t i o n t o m o d i f y o r t o t e r m i n a t e t h a t o b l i g a t i o n r e t r o a c t i v e t o a date not e a r l i e r than the date the p a r t y f i l e d a p e t i t i o n to modify. See H i n d s v. H i n d s , 887 So. 2d 267, 273 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 3 ) . 1
The c i r c u i t c o u r t c a l c u l a t e d the i n t e r e s t " a t a r a t e of 1 2 % p e r annum t h r o u g h A u g u s t 2011 and a t a r a t e o f 7.5% p e r annum b e g i n n i n g S e p t e m b e r 1, 2011." 2
3
2111194 per
month
i n alimony
contempt
hearing
due
and
to
the
the
entry
lapse of time of
suspended h i s alimony o b l i g a t i o n . partial 2011
the
between
judgment
the
that
had
The f o r m e r h u s b a n d h a d made
a l i m o n y payments i n t h e amount o f $22,000 f r o m
t h r o u g h May
pursuant
to
2012
the
($2,000 p e r month f o r 11 months)
judgment
suspended.
The
requesting
that
$38,920.12
award,
$16,920.12
($38,920.12 -
On May
former
husband
the c i r c u i t thus
4, 2012,
entered
in
sought
April
an
July that,
2012,
amended
were
judgment,
c o u r t s u b t r a c t $22,000 f r o m
r e d u c i n g the
former
w i f e ' s award
the to
$22,000).
the former w i f e f i l e d a motion to a l t e r ,
amend, o r v a c a t e t h e c i r c u i t
c o u r t ' s judgment.
She
requested
t h a t the c i r c u i t c o u r t vacate i t s order suspending the husband's a l i m o n y o b l i g a t i o n .
Furthermore,
former
a c c o r d i n g to the
former w i f e , i f the c i r c u i t c o u r t v a c a t e d i t s o r d e r , then the f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s a r r e a r a g e and t h e i n t e r e s t on t h a t a r r e a r a g e w o u l d i n c r e a s e and t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d w o u l d owe $52,997.04. motions,
After
a
h e a r i n g on
an amended j u d g m e n t was
the
parties'
t h e amount o f postjudgment
e n t e r e d on A u g u s t
1,
2012.
The c i r c u i t c o u r t , among o t h e r t h i n g s , s u b t r a c t e d $22,000 f r o m
4
2111194 its
judgment
awarding
the
former
wife
$38,920.12,
thus
r e d u c i n g t h e f o r m e r w i f e ' s a w a r d t o $16,920.12. The
former w i f e f i l e d
a t i m e l y n o t i c e of appeal s e e k i n g
t h i s c o u r t ' s r e v i e w o f two
i s s u e s : whether,
by
applying
the
f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s p a r t i a l payments o f $2,000 t o t h e $38,920.12 a r r e a r a g e r a t h e r t h a n t h e f u l l amount due,
the former husband
received
the
a "double
credit"
3
and
whether
circuit
e r r e d by s u s p e n d i n g t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s a l i m o n y The paid
following
alimony
2010,
facts
i n the
are undisputed.
amount o f
and he p a i d p a r t i a l
The
court
obligation.
former
husband
$4,000 p e r month t h r o u g h
May
a l i m o n y p a y m e n t s i n t h e amount o f
$2,000 p e r month f r o m J u n e 2010
t h r o u g h May
2012.
However,
the c i r c u i t c o u r t suspended the former husband's o b l i g a t i o n t o p a y any amount o f a l i m o n y as o f J u l y 2011.
Due
to the
five-
month l a p s e o f t i m e b e t w e e n t h e c o n t e m p t h e a r i n g and t h e e n t r y of
the
judgment,
the
former
husband
made
$2,000
partial
The former w i f e d i d not r a i s e the "double-credit" argument i n h e r p o s t j u d g m e n t m o t i o n , n o r d i d she c i t e r e l e v a n t a u t h o r i t y i n h e r b r i e f on a p p e a l . However, as t h e f o r m e r w i f e c l a i m s i n h e r b r i e f , h e r f i r s t i s s u e i s " e s s e n t i a l l y a math p r o b l e m " ; we a c k n o w l e d g e t h a t r e l e v a n t a u t h o r i t y may not exist. 3
5
2111194 a l i m o n y payments f r o m J u n e 2010 t h r o u g h May 2012 i n t h e amount o f $48,000
total
($2,000 p e r month f o r 24 m o n t h s ) .
I n i t s amended j u d g m e n t , t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t began w i t h t h e parties'
stipulated
interest
due
subtracted
arrearage
($36,000
$22,000
--
+ the
figure
o f $36,000,
$2,920.12
=
amount
the
of
$38,920.12), partial
payments
t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d h a d made f r o m J u l y
May 2012
($2,000 p e r month f o r 11 m o n t h s ) .
the
former husband
$16,920.12 that,
owed
the
The
alimony
November 2011
payments
against
he
paid
t h e $38,920.12
through
arrearage
between
c r e d i t f o r the July
arrearage,
s o , she c o n t e n d s , b e c a u s e t h e c i r c u i t
credited
court
the former husband f o r the p a r t i a l
2011
the
had
alimony
arrearage.
The c i r c u i t
We
and
circuit This
already payments
he p a i d b e t w e e n J u l y 2011 and November 2011 i n d e t e r m i n i n g $38,920.12
of
former w i f e contends
c o u r t awarded a " d o u b l e c r e d i t " t o the f o r m e r husband. is
and
alimony
2011
an
by a w a r d i n g t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d a $10,000
partial
the
I t determined that
former wife
($38,920.12 - $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 ) .
added
the
disagree.
court's calculation
of the arrearage
t h e f o r m e r w i f e began w i t h a d e t e r m i n a t i o n
of the t o t a l
due t o h e r f r o m J u n e 2010 t h o u g h November 2011.
6
owed t o amount
T h a t amount
2111194 was
$72,000
($4,000 p e r
month
f o r 18
months).
The
former
h u s b a n d h a d p a i d $36,000 d u r i n g t h o s e months ($2,000 p e r month for
18 m o n t h s ) .
Thus, t h e amount o f u n p a i d a l i m o n y owed b y
t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d i n November 2011 was May
However, b y
2012, t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d h a d p a i d an a d d i t i o n a l $22,000 i n
a l i m o n y t h a t he was 11
$36,000.
months)
judgment alimony
not r e q u i r e d t o pay
because
had
the
circuit
retroactively
obligation
as
of
court's
suspended July
($2,000 p e r month f o r April
the
2011.
25,
former
The
husband's
circuit
p r o p e r l y s u b t r a c t e d $22,000 f r o m t h e f o r m e r w i f e ' s award.
2012,
court
$38,920.12
T h e r e f o r e , we c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d d i d n o t
receive a "double
credit."
Next, the former w i f e argues t h a t the c i r c u i t court
erred
by s u s p e n d i n g t h e former husband's o b l i g a t i o n t o pay a l i m o n y . The
former
conflicting t o pay
wife
concedes
that
evidence regarding
alimony while
he
the the
circuit
court
former husband's
i s i n p r i s o n , b u t she
resolved ability
contends
that
t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g o f c o n t e m p t and i t s s u s p e n s i o n o f the
former
husband's
"inconsistent."
We
do
obligation not
judgment r e a d s , i n p e r t i n e n t
agree. part:
7
to The
pay
alimony
circuit
is
court's
2111194 " T h i s c o u r t i s f a c e d w i t h a f o r m e r H u s b a n d who i s u n a b l e t o p a y h i s m o n t h l y a l i m o n y payment due t o h i s b e i n g i n c a r c e r a t e d and h a v i n g no income and a f o r m e r W i f e who i s w o r k i n g and e a r n i n g an income, b u t who i s e n t i t l e d t o m o n t h l y a l i m o n y p u r s u a n t t o the F i n a l Decree of D i v o r c e d e n t e r e d i n t h i s matter. "
"The former Husband i s a g r a d u a t e of the U n i v e r s i t y Of A l a b a m a S c h o o l Of Law and was a l i c e n s e d a t t o r n e y i n the S t a t e of Alabama p r i o r t o h i s i n c a r c e r a t i o n . The former Husband certainly s h o u l d have b e e n aware o f t h e f a c t t h a t o n l y a c o u r t o f c o m p e t e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n , s u c h as t h i s one, may m o d i f y an a w a r d o f a l i m o n y . The former Husband f a i l e d to b r i n g t h i s matter to t h i s Court p r i o r to d e c i d i n g t o p a y o n l y o n e - h a l f (^) o f h i s C o u r t O r d e r e d a l i m o n y t o t h e f o r m e r W i f e . ... B a s e d upon t h e above f a c t s t h e f o r m e r W i f e i s a l s o a w a r d e d A t t o r n e y ' s Fees i n t h e amount o f T h r e e T h o u s a n d Two Hundred D o l l a r s ($3,200.00).
"The f o r m e r Husband's m o n t h l y a l i m o n y payments s h a l l be s u s p e n d e d [ ; ] h o w e v e r , t h e y s h a l l c o n t i n u e t o a c c r u e a t a r a t e o f $4,000.00 p e r month and t h e f o r m e r Husband s h a l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e payment o f same i n amount t o be d e t e r m i n e d once t h e f o r m e r Husband i s r e l e a s e d f r o m p r i s o n and has found f u l l - t i m e employment." The
circuit
court held
the
former husband i n
contempt,
a w a r d e d t h e f o r m e r w i f e a t t o r n e y f e e s , and r e q u i r e d t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d t o r e m a i n o b l i g a t e d f o r t h e e n t i r e amount o f a l i m o n y due
to the
former
wife
former w i f e a f t e r argues
that
his release
the 8
circuit
from p r i s o n .
court
exceeded
The its
2111194 discretion failing
by
t o pay
finding
the
former
husband
a l l the ordered alimony
in
contempt
t h a t was
due
for
before
J u l y 2011 b u t by s u s p e n d i n g t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s o b l i g a t i o n t o p a y a l i m o n y f r o m J u l y 2011 When e v i d e n c e
until
he i s r e l e a s e d f r o m
i s presented to a t r i a l
prison.
c o u r t i n an
ore
tenus p r o c e e d i n g , the t r i a l c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g r e g a r d i n g contempt is
presumed c o r r e c t .
V a r n e r v. V a r n e r ,
(Ala.
C i v . App.
1994)
(Ala.
C i v . App.
1994)).
or So.
(citing
1989)).
(citing
So.
2d 273,
P i e r c e v. H e l k a , 634 So. 2d
277 1031
C i v i l contempt i s i n t e n d e d t o c o e r c e
compel c o m p l i a n c e w i t h 2d a t 277
662
orders of the c o u r t .
S t a t e v. Thomas, 550
Varner,
So. 2d 1067
(Ala.
Furthermore, " ' [ t ] h e o b l i g a t i o n t o pay periodic a l i m o n y may be m o d i f i e d when t h e r e has b e e n a m a t e r i a l change i n t h e f i n a n c i a l or e c o n o m i c needs o f t h e p a y e e s p o u s e and t h e a b i l i t y of the payor spouse t o respond t o t h o s e n e e d s . M c K e n z i e v. M c K e n z i e , 568 So. 2d 819 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1990) . The b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a m a t e r i a l change i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s i s upon t h e m o v i n g p a r t y . McKenzie. A d e c i s i o n to modify p e r i o d i c alimony l i e s w i t h i n the d i s c r e t i o n of the t r i a l c o u r t and w i l l n o t be s e t a s i d e on a p p e a l u n l e s s a p a l p a b l e abuse o f t h a t d i s c r e t i o n i s shown.'
"Maddox v. Maddox, 612 So. 2d 1222, 1223 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1992) . See a l s o T a y l o r v. T a y l o r , 640 So. 2d
9
662
2111194 971 So.
( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 4 ) , and O y l e r v. O y l e r , 2d 650 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 4 ) . "
H i n d s v. H i n d s , 887 So. 2d 267, 272 this
( A l a . C i v . App.
446
2003) .
In
c a s e , t h e f i n d i n g o f c o n t e m p t and t h e s u s p e n s i o n o f t h e
former
husband's
alimony
obligation
are
d i s c r e t i o n of the c i r c u i t
c o u r t , and we
discretion.
the
Furthermore
former husband u n i l a t e r a l l y before
he
sought
Thus, t h e c i r c u i t
t o have
judgment
well
within
the
f i n d no abuse o f t h a t i s consistent.
The
r e d u c e d h i s a l i m o n y payment w e l l h i s alimony
obligation
modified.
c o u r t c o u l d have c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e
former
h u s b a n d ' s f a i l u r e t o pay h i s e n t i r e a l i m o n y o b l i g a t i o n b e f o r e July
2011
was
terminate,
or
contemptuous but suspend
his
that
h i s request to
alimony
obligation
modify,
was
well
supported. In a r e l a t e d a r g u m e n t , t h e f o r m e r w i f e c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t i m p r o p e r l y r e s t r i c t e d her a b i l i t y to c o l l e c t the a r r e a r a g e due by r e t r o a c t i v e l y s u s p e n d i n g t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s alimony o b l i g a t i o n .
The
former w i f e i s c o r r e c t t h a t
a l i m o n y payments a r e f i n a l j u d g m e n t s any
o t h e r judgment.
So.
2d
320,
323
be c o l l e c t e d
See M o t l e y v. M o t l e y , 505
1228-29 ( A l a . C i v . App. 686
and may
10
App.
as
So.
2d
v.
Anderson,
1 9 8 6 ) ; see a l s o A n d e r s o n (Ala. Civ.
accrued
1996)(an
1228,
"[a]limony
2111194 arrearage
i s a final
j u d g m e n t as o f t h e d a t e due a n d i s n o t
subject to modification," c i t i n g
H a r r i s v . H a r r i s , 553 So. 2d
129, 130 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 9 ) ) .
However, t h i s c o u r t h a s h e l d
t h a t o n l y t h o s e a l i m o n y payments t h a t have m a t u r e d b e f o r e t h e filing v.
o f a p e t i t i o n t o m o d i f y a r e immune f r o m c h a n g e .
Taylor,
640
1994)(explaining
So. that
2d
971,
"payments
975
Taylor
(Ala. Civ.
of alimony
...
App.
constitute
f i n a l j u d g m e n t s f r o m t h e d a t e t h a t t h e y become due, a n d t h o s e payments
that
mature
before
the f i l i n g
immune f r o m c h a n g e " ) .
That i s , a t r i a l
modify,
or
terminate,
suspend
of a p e t i t i o n
are
c o u r t h a s t h e power t o
an
alimony
obligation
r e t r o a c t i v e t o t h e d a t e t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n p e t i t i o n was
filed.
See H i n d s , 887 So. 2d a t 273 ( d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t a t r i a l
court,
considering alimony
petition
obligation,
terminate than
a
t o modify
has
that obligation
the date
or terminate
"the d i s c r e t i o n retroactive
t h e [spouse]
filed
a
spouse's
t o modify
t o a date
or to
not e a r l i e r
h i s [or her] p e t i t i o n
to
modify"). The court's
former
wife
authority
relies
on c a s e l a w
to prevent
relating
or r e s t r i c t
j u d g m e n t f o r an a r r e a r a g e when t h e t r i a l
11
to a
trial
enforcement
of a
c o u r t h a s o r d e r e d an
2111194 arrearage
to
be
Indeed, a t r i a l a
spouse
to
paid
installments.
c o u r t may
enforce
a
However, t h e c i r c u i t former w i f e
in
not r e s t r i c t
judgment
c o u r t has
judgment i t awarded h e r . power
to
suspend
retroactive Although
to the
the
former
date
he
alimony.
husband's
of Id.
attempted to r e s t r i c t
$16,920.12
filed
supra.
or i m p a i r the r i g h t
the
alimony-arrearage
I n s t e a d , the c i r c u i t
the
circuit
Motley,
f o r past-due
not
from e n f o r c i n g the
See
court used i t s
alimony
payments
his modification petition.
c o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n to suspend the
former
h u s b a n d ' s a l i m o n y payments d u r i n g h i s i n c a r c e r a t i o n i m p a c t t h e alimony
a c t u a l l y due
to the
former w i f e , the
circuit
court's
e x e r c i s e o f i t s power does n o t i m p a c t t h e f o r m e r w i f e ' s to
enforce
Therefore,
the we
alimony-arrearage reject
the
former
judgment wife's
in
her
argument
judgment.
favor.
that
c i r c u i t c o u r t i m p e r m i s s i b l y i n f r i n g e d on h e r r i g h t t o the alimony-arrearage
right
the
enforce
4
T h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d has n o t f i l e d an a p p e a l , and we have r e s o l v e d t h i s appeal u s i n g the s t i p u l a t e d - a r r e a r a g e f i g u r e the p a r t i e s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t . An a g r e e m e n t r e a c h e d i n s e t t l e m e n t o f l i t i g a t i o n i s as b i n d i n g on t h e p a r t i e s as any o t h e r c o n t r a c t . M i l l e r v. M i l l e r , 10 So. 3d 570, 571 n.1 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 8 ) . However, we have n o t o v e r l o o k e d t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s t i p u l a t e d - a r r e a r a g e f i g u r e o f $36,000, and t h e i n t e r e s t c a l c u l a t e d thereon, i s incorrect. The p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d t o an a r r e a r a g e o f $36,000 ($2,000 p e r month f o r 18 4
12
2111194 AFFIRMED. Thompson, P . J . , and P i t t m a n , Moore,
and Donaldson, J J . ,
concur.
months). The c i r c u i t c o u r t s u s p e n d e d t h e f o r m e r h u s b a n d ' s a l i m o n y o b l i g a t i o n f o r 5 o f t h e 18 months i n c l u d e d i n t h e p e r i o d upon w h i c h t h e s t i p u l a t i o n was c a l c u l a t e d . Thus, t h e a c t u a l a r r e a r a g e p e r i o d was 13 months. The a r r e a r a g e f o r t h e p e r i o d o f June 2010 t h r o u g h June 2011 was $26,000 ($2,000 p e r month f o r 13 m o n t h s ) . To have p r o p e r l y c a l c u l a t e d t h e a r r e a r a g e due, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t s h o u l d have r e c a l c u l a t e d t h e i n t e r e s t due on $26,000 and s u b t r a c t e d t h e p a r t i a l a l i m o n y payments o f $22,000 ($2,000 p e r month f o r 11 m o n t h s ) . 13