Bingert v. Bingert (1976)

See also Greenwood v. Greenwood, 1999 ND 126, ¶ 17 , 596 N.W.2d 317 ; Wheeler v. Wheeler, 548 N.W.2d 27, 30 (N.D.1996); Becker, 262 N.W.2d at 484 ; Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467-68 (N.D.1976).

Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 469 (N.D.1976).

In Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 469 (N.D.1976), we said: “We believe that the trend in modern domestic-relations law is to treat alimony as a method for rehabilitating the party disadvantaged by the divorce.

Pearson v. Pearson, 2000 ND 20, ¶ 7 , 606 N.W.2d 128 ; Cermak v. Cermak, 1997 ND 187 , ¶ 6 n.l, 569 N.W.2d 280 (“Even without a specific provision in the divorce decree, permanent spousal support may terminate upon the remarriage of the recipient spouse unless the recipient shows extraordinary circumstances.”); Wiege v. Wiege, 518 N.W.2d 708, 712 (N.D. 1994); Ramsdell v. Ramsdell, 454 N.W.2d 522, 524 (N.D. 1990); Roen v. Roen, 438 N.W2d 170, 173 (N.D. 1989); Rustand v. Rusta…

See also Greenwood v. Greenwood , 1999 ND 126, ¶ 17 , 596 N.W.2d 317 ; Wheeler v. Wheeler , 548 N.W.2d 27, 30 (N.D. 1996); Becker , 262 N.W.2d at 484 ; Bingert v. Bingert , 247 N.W.2d 464, 467-68 (N.D. 1976).

Refusing to allow a spousal support obligor’s remarriage to constitute a change of circumstances justifying a reduction or elimination of a spousal support obligation “is required in fairness to spouses and children who already exist, and one who is divorced cannot be permitted to choose a course which deprives them of what they are entitled to for the benefit of a future family he chooses to create.” Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976).

While changes in the financial abilities of the parties are a principal concern when considering a motion to modify a divorce judgment, Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976), the trier of fact must go beyond the parties’ incomes.

Muehler v. Muehler, 333 N.W.2d 432, 433 (N.D.1983), quoting Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976).

A trial court has continuing jurisdiction to modify a divorce judgment with respect to spousal support and child support, provided that a change in circumstances has occurred. § 14-05-24 of the North Dakota Century Code; Nygord v. Dietz, 332 N.W.2d 708, 709 (N.D.1983) [modification of child support]; Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976) [modification of spousal support].

Although changes in the financial abilities or needs of the parties is a principal concern in the context of a motion to modify a divorce judgment, Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976), the inquiry needs go beyond the simple fact that a change in the parties’ incomes has occurred.

Smith v. Smith, 326 N.W.2d 697, 700 (N.D.1982); Briese v. Briese, 325 N.W.2d 245, 249 (N.D.1982); Gooselaw, supra, 320 N.W.2d at 493 ; Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 469 (N.D.1976).

The determination of a just award is within the discretion of the trial court and will depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. § 14-05-24, N.D.C.C.; Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976).

Williams v. Williams, 302 N.W.2d 754, 758 (N.D.1981); Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 469 (N.D.1976).

We recently held in Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 465 (N.D.1976), that: “Facts tending to show that a party to a property-settlement agreement was an alcoholic at the time of the agreement, without more, do not show incompetence . ” Syllabus by the Court, ¶3.

See also, Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 468 (N.D.1976). [1] The proponent of the continuance of alimony payments following remarriage carries a considerable burden.

See Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464 (N.D.1976).

See Bingert v. Bingert , 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D. 1976).

See Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976).

See also Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464, 467 (N.D.1976) (wife’s income from a second job as babysitter not a change of circumstances sufficient to modify alimony).

Wheeler, id., at 925; see also Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464 (N.D.1976).

See Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464 (N.D.1976) (noting national trend).

See Bingert v. Bingert, 247 N.W.2d 464 (N.D.1977).