Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2 (2026)
Findings concerning maintenance
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 2. A court may make the following findings concerning maintenance:
(1) If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is materially affected, the court may find that maintenance for the spouse is necessary during the period of incapacity, subject to further order of the court.
(2) If the court finds that:
(A) a spouse lacks sufficient property, including marital property apportioned to the spouse, to provide for the spouse's needs; and
(B) the spouse is the custodian of a child whose physical or mental incapacity requires the custodian to forgo employment;
the court may find that maintenance is necessary for the spouse in an amount and for a period of time that the court considers appropriate.
(3) After considering:
(A) the educational level of each spouse at the time of marriage and at the time the action is commenced;
(B) whether an interruption in the education, training, or employment of a spouse who is seeking maintenance occurred during the marriage as a result of homemaking or child care responsibilities, or both;
(C) the earning capacity of each spouse, including educational background, training, employment skills, work experience, and length of presence in or absence from the job market; and
(D) the time and expense necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the spouse who is seeking maintenance to find appropriate employment;
a court may find that rehabilitative maintenance for the spouse seeking maintenance is necessary in an amount and for a period of time that the court considers appropriate, but not to exceed three (3) years from the date of the final decree.
[Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-1-11.5-11(e) part.]
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.7.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Dewbrew v. Dewbrew, 849 N.E.2d 636 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
Dewbrew v. Dewbrew, 849 N.E.2d 636 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. A court may order rehabilitative maintenance for no more than three years if it finds that a spouse needs support while acquiring sufficient education or training to get an appropriate job.”
Bizik v. Bizik, 753 N.E.2d 762 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “Indiana Code § 31-15-7-2(1) provides: If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is materially affected, the court may find that maintenance for the spouse is…”
Marriage of Zan v. Zan, 820 N.E.2d 1284 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “at 1276 ; see also Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. A court may order rehabilitative maintenance for no more than three years if it finds that a spouse needs support while acquiring sufficient education or training to get an appropriate job.”
Haville v. Haville, 825 N.E.2d 375 (Ind. 2005). “" Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2(1) (emphasis added).”
Marriage of Snow v. England, 862 N.E.2d 664 (Ind. 2007). “5-11(e) (West 1995) (current version at Ind.Code Ann. § 31-15-7-2 (West 2007))). For example, a court may order incapacity maintenance if it “finds a spouse to be *668 physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support…”
Kimberly L. Eads v. Robert J. Eads, Jr., 114 N.E.3d 868 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “Indiana Code section 31-15-7-2 sets forth the requirements of each: A court may make the following findings concerning maintenance: (1) If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support…”
Cannon v. Cannon, 758 N.E.2d 524 (Ind. 2001). “Code § 31-15-7-2(3) were the factors to be considered when awarding incapacity maintenance under Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2 (1). Cannon v. Cannon, 729 N.”
Barbara J. Pohl v. Michael G. Pohl, 15 N.E.3d 1006 (Ind. 2014). “See I.C. § 31-15-7-2(1). But in our view, the Addendum is best understood as first establishing Michael’s entitlement to maintenance as of its effective date, consistent with the trial court’s statutory authority— and then second, Michael separately waiving his right to collect…”
Brenda Alexander v. Donald Alexander, 980 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “The Decree contained the following relevant special findings: 1) Brenda was injured in 1988; 2) that injury was exacerbated by two subsequent automobile accidents; 3) Brenda’s pain includes herniated discs in her back and neck, degenerative disc disease, as well as carpel tunnel…”
Augspurger v. Hudson, 802 N.E.2d 503 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “[2] Ind.Code Ann. § 31-15-7-2(1) (West 1998) provides for maintenance of an incapacitated spouse as follows: If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is…”
Brad Barton v. Alexandra Barton, 47 N.E.3d 368 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. With regard to such incapacity maintenance, our supreme court has observed, Where a trial court finds that a spouse is physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of that spouse to support himself or herself is materially affected,…”
Pala v. Loubser, 943 N.E.2d 400 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). “With respect to the award of maintenance in favor of Pala, we noted that under Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2 if a court finds a spouse to be physically incapacitated the court may find maintenance is necessary during a period of incapacity and that although the trial court had found that…”
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(1): 35 cases
Bizik v. Bizik, 753 N.E.2d 762 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “Indiana Code § 31-15-7-2(1) provides: If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is materially affected, the court may find that maintenance for the spouse is…”
Haville v. Haville, 825 N.E.2d 375 (Ind. 2005). “" Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2(1) (emphasis added).”
Barbara J. Pohl v. Michael G. Pohl, 15 N.E.3d 1006 (Ind. 2014). “See I.C. § 31-15-7-2(1). But in our view, the Addendum is best understood as first establishing Michael’s entitlement to maintenance as of its effective date, consistent with the trial court’s statutory authority— and then second, Michael separately waiving his right to collect…”
Brenda Alexander v. Donald Alexander, 980 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “The Decree contained the following relevant special findings: 1) Brenda was injured in 1988; 2) that injury was exacerbated by two subsequent automobile accidents; 3) Brenda’s pain includes herniated discs in her back and neck, degenerative disc disease, as well as carpel tunnel…”
Augspurger v. Hudson, 802 N.E.2d 503 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “[2] Ind.Code Ann. § 31-15-7-2(1) (West 1998) provides for maintenance of an incapacitated spouse as follows: If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is…”
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(2): 5 cases
Balicki v. Balicki, 837 N.E.2d 532 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
Brinkmann v. Brinkmann, 772 N.E.2d 441 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).
Marriage of Snow v. England, 862 N.E.2d 664 (Ind. 2007). “5-11(e) (West 1995) (current version at Ind.Code Ann. § 31-15-7-2 (West 2007))). For example, a court may order incapacity maintenance if it “finds a spouse to be *668 physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support…”
Kevin Gertiser v. Anne Stokes f/k/a Gertiser, 45 N.E.3d 363 (Ind. 2015).
Cox v. Cox, 833 N.E.2d 1077 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(2)(A): 1 case
Michael Farrell v. Elva Farrell (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(2)(B): 1 case
Jennifer Alao-Hamed v. Adeniran Alao-Hamed (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(3): 13 cases
Dewbrew v. Dewbrew, 849 N.E.2d 636 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. A court may order rehabilitative maintenance for no more than three years if it finds that a spouse needs support while acquiring sufficient education or training to get an appropriate job.”
Marriage of Zan v. Zan, 820 N.E.2d 1284 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “at 1276 ; see also Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. A court may order rehabilitative maintenance for no more than three years if it finds that a spouse needs support while acquiring sufficient education or training to get an appropriate job.”
Cannon v. Cannon, 758 N.E.2d 524 (Ind. 2001). “Code § 31-15-7-2(3) were the factors to be considered when awarding incapacity maintenance under Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2 (1). Cannon v. Cannon, 729 N.”
Cowart v. White, 711 N.E.2d 523 (Ind. 1999).
Kevin Gertiser v. Anne Stokes f/k/a Gertiser, 45 N.E.3d 363 (Ind. 2015).
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(3)(D): 1 case
Dewbrew v. Dewbrew, 849 N.E.2d 636 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 31-15-7-2. A court may order rehabilitative maintenance for no more than three years if it finds that a spouse needs support while acquiring sufficient education or training to get an appropriate job.”
Ind. Code § 31-15-7-2(8): 1 case
Cox v. Cox, 833 N.E.2d 1077 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.