What Are the Benefits and Risks of a Spousal Support Buyout?
Deborah E. Nelson offers a case study to demonstrate the risks and rewards of spousal support buyout.
January 22, 2024 at 09:40 AM
6 minute read
A Case Study
The pre-trial conference has concluded, and a trial date has been scheduled in six weeks. The expense of drafting trial briefs, pre-marking exhibits and preparing witnesses appears unavoidable. Mediation has been unsuccessful in accomplishing your client's primary goal: a buyout of spousal support, in whole or in part, in order to avoid the inevitable motion practice when she attains the full retirement age of 67. As you have advised your client, the judge at trial does not have the authority to order lump sum spousal support or any hybrid or creative approach to spousal support termination that doesn't comply with the alimony statute.
The facts of the case are straightforward: Wife earns $350,000, gross, and has worked in finance for 25 years, her entire career. She is 59 years old and has been married to Husband for 25 years. Both of their children are emancipated. Recently, Wife received an offer to teach in the MBA program at a university—a career change she has long considered. Wife would earn $150,000 as a professor, far less than she is earning now. She understands that a voluntary career change would not relieve her from the obligation of paying spousal support based upon her marital salary. Wife would like to retire at age 67 and has plans to remarry. You have counseled Wife about the risks of paying lump sum spousal support, including but not limited to Husband's remarriage terminating her obligation. She is aware that she may be jeopardizing her financial future in order to structure the buyout and does not want to "pay out" all of the marital assets to Husband. Regardless, Wife is anxious to negotiate a creative way to attain her goals, so that she is working for herself, and not to pay spousal support.
Husband is a tenured high school teacher, earning $85,000, gross, per year. He is also 59 years old. Husband is a participant in a Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund and will be eligible for retirement at age 62. Unless he remarries, Husband will be eligible to collect one-half of Wife's social security benefit or his own, but not both. He plans to buy a home in the school district where he teaches.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllReminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
8 minute readAttorney of the Year Finalist: Matheu Nunn's Supreme Court Successes
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250