Alimony: Is Padding Expenses Justified? Or Risky?

December 28, 2018

A Court May Decline to Accept Claimed Expenses that Are Overstated and Unsupported. This is an appeal from a district court’s award of alimony in the aftermath of a contentious divorce. Wife contends that the court abused its discretion when it declined to accept her claimed expenses at face value--even when the claimed expenses by Wife had no relation to historical needs, exceeded the Husband's take-home pay, were overstated, and Wife failed to provide credible evidence regarding finances and expenses--as opposed to Husband's testimony which was credible, detailed and specific.

Hartvigsen v. Hartvigsen, 2018 UT App 238 (Filed December 28, 2018)

Click HERE to read entire case.

February 14, 2019
Distance does not always mean statutory minimum parent time. Court could accommodate with additional weekends, summer time and holidays.

Nebeker v. Orton, 2019 UT App 23 (Filed February 14, 2019). In this case, the father and mother lived approximately […]

Read More
January 10, 2019
12 Statutory Basis for Contempt and Inherent Contempt Powers

Rosser v. Rosser Summary: A statutory contempt remedy simply does not fit the facts of this case, even if we […]

Read More
April 11, 2018
Utah's Divorce 90-Day Waiting Period Changed to 30 Days

The Utah legislature passed Senate Bill 25, which changes the waiting minimum period for divorces from 90 days to 30 […]

Read More
envelopephone-handsetmap-markermagnifiercrossmenuarrow-up-circle