Cunningham v. Cunningham
In Cunningham v. Cunningham, Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. FA094017494S (March 9, 2011, Shay, J.), the plaintiff wife and defendant husband were married for approximately twenty-two years, and had two minor children. At the time of the divorce, one child was enrolled in college and the other was in high school. The parties both lived in Stamford, Connecticut and went to court to negotiate an alimony agreement.
Spousal History
The husband was fifty-five years old and in good health. He held both a bachelor’s degree and master’s degree from Southern Methodist University, and had been fully employed since graduation. Commencing in 1984, and throughout the marriage, the husband was employed as a principal in a consulting business. The Court noted that he was required to retire at the end of the fiscal year in which he turned 62. The Court also noted that the husband received a regular draw, as well as quarterly distributions.
At the time of the divorce, the wife was fifty-four years old, and although she experienced some health issues during the marriage, she was also in good health. The wife was a graduate of Stone Hill College, and throughout the course of the marriage, was employed as a flight attendant. She worked a full schedule for most of the marriage, with the exception of two maternity leaves of ten months each, and a furlough of one and one-half years following September 11, 2001.
Court Decision
The Court found that during the course of the marriage, the parties enjoyed a very comfortable lifestyle, which included extensive travel, yard maintenance, and in-home help, and amassed a substantial estate including an investment account having an approximate value of $1,460,000.00, as well as a deferred income account and several retirement vehicles. The Court further found that based upon the parties’ financial affidavits the husband’s net monthly income was $62,629.00, and that the wife’s net monthly income was $1,574.51.
With respect to alimony, the Court ordered that commencing February 1, 2011 and monthly thereafter, the husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $20,000.00 as and for periodic alimony, until the death of either party, the remarriage of the wife, the entry into a civil union by the wife, or January 31, 2018, whichever shall sooner occur. The Court specifically designated the term of alimony as non-modifiable, and granted the wife a safe harbor with respect to her future earnings up to $36,000 per year.
–
If you have any questions relating to alimony or divorce proceedings, please feel free to contact managing partner, Attorney Joseph C. Maya by telephone at (203) 221-3100 or by e-mail at JMaya@Mayalaw.com. Call today to schedule a free initial consultation.