CASE HIGHLIGHTS: In re Smith (1990)

In re Marriage of Smith (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 469

LESSON OF SMITH:
To limit later modification when supporting spouse has an increase in income, in marital stipulation and order, include a finding that the amount of support is sufficient to meet needs of living comparable to reasonable living standard available to the parties while married.
(See Smith at p, 492)

QUESTION IN SMITH:
Can a supported spouse submit a request for upward modification of spousal support purely on the grounds of increased income and ability to pay of the supporting spouse?
COURTS ANSWER: NO.

FACTS:
The trial court found, and wife concedes:

1. Husband worked excessive hours during the marriage and
2. The parties established a standard of living that was beyond their means.

Based upon the supporting spouse's present financial earnings, as a matter of law, can a supported spouse move for an upward modification of spousal support to enable her to live at that precise standard of living established during the marriage, despite the fact the marital lifestyle was based on excessive work hours, and 'living beyond the couple's means?'

LOWER COURT ORDER:
Wife was awarded an upward modification of spousal support by trial court. The order almost doubled the monthly support from $1,700 original order to $3,300. (Wife had requested increase to $7,317.)

Husband appealed on grounds:
(1) There was no showing of a material change of circumstances since the prior order and (2) There was no showing that the prior order when made did not meet wife's needs consistent with the marital standard of living.
Wife appealed on grounds the lower court was mandated to increase spousal suport to $7,317 to enable her to live at the standard of living established during the marriage..

APPEALS COURT HOLDING:

In this case we hold that before a motion for upward modification of spousal support can be considered the moving party must prove that the prior order, when made, was insufficient to meet his or her reasonable needs as measured by the applicable guidelines set forth in Civil Code section 4801, subdivision (a), or that the reasonable cost of satisfying those needs has increased. If this is shown, the moving party must then prove the obligor's ability to pay increased spousal support. Smith at p. 469
... ... ...

Our analysis begins with the general rule that for a court to consider a motion for modification of spousal support there must first be a showing of a material change of circumstances since the last prior support order, taking into consideration both the needs of the supported spouse and the ability of the supporting spouse to meet those needs. (In re Marriage of Kuppinger, supra, 48 Cal.App.3d at p. 633.) A material change of circumstances may consist solely of an increase in the supporting spouse's ability to pay, but if that is the only change, then to obtain an increase in support there must also be a showing that the amount of support previously ordered had not been adequate to meet the supported spouse's reasonable needs at that time. (In re Marriage of Hopwood, supra, 214 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1607-1608; In re Marriage of Hoffmeister, supra, 191 Cal.App.3d at pp. 363-364.) Smith, p. 483

...(the wife's ) needs which must be examined and proven, not Bill's standard of living due to post-separation separate property earnings. (In re Marriage of Hoffmeister, supra, 191 Cal.App.3d 351.)
3. Conclusion.
....the parties' actual marital standard of living has reduced significance as a point of reference for determining Pat's reasonable needs and support, due to the fact that during the marriage Bill worked excessive hours and the parties lived beyond their means. A more appropriate measure of Pat's post-separation needs is what would have been a reasonable standard of living for the parties given what Bill would have earned had he worked at a reasonably human paceSmith, p. 493