Paul v. Paul

60 A.3d 1080 (Del. 2012)

 

RULE:

In a spousal support context, the term "regularly residing" means living together with some degree of continuity; two people may be regularly residing together even though they maintain separate homes.

FACTS:

The parties' divorce agreement provided that alimony would terminate upon the wife's cohabitation, as defined in Del. Code Ann. tit. 13, § 1512(g). After the wife became romantically involved with a companion, the husband's private investigator surveilled the wife. Based on the investigator's report, the husband filed a petition to terminate alimony. The Family Court denied the motion, focusing on the fact that the wife and her companion maintained separate homes, and the absence of evidence as to whether they spent the majority of their free time together. The husband appealed.

ISSUE:

Did the Family Court apply the correct legal standard in deciding whether the wife and her companion were cohabiting?

ANSWER:

No.

CONCLUSION:

The court reversed the decision of the Family Court, and remanded, holding that the Family Court used the wrong definition of "regularly residing."

Click here to view the full text case and earn your Daily Research Points.