Notes of Decisions
Cited in
23
cases, 1998–2016 · leading case:
Dargie v. Dargie, 2001 ME 127 (Me. 2001).
Dargie v. Dargie, 2001 ME 127 (Me. 2001).
· cites it 14× “[¶ 27] The District Court's authority with respect to spousal support determinations was governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951, [3] the statute then in effect.”
Largay v. Largay, 2000 ME 108 (Me. 2000).
· cites it 4× “[¶ 12] The trial court’s authority with respect to spousal support is governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1997). 1 The factors a court considers when determining an award of spousal support are set forth in section 951(l)(A)-(0).”
Spencer v. Spencer, 1998 ME 252 (Me. 1998).
· cites it 3× “19-A M.R.S.A. § 951(1) (1998). 3 . When the Superior Court acts as an intermediate appellate court, the Law Court reviews the decision of the trial court directly.”
Patricia Mae Voter v. Dexter R. Voter, 2015 ME 11 (Me. 2015).
“[¶ 4] In May 2018, Dexter filed a motion to modify the amount of his spousal support obligation pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 951(4) (2014), alleging a change of circumstances because he is no longer employed.”
Hedrich v. Hedrich, 1998 ME 248 (Me. 1998).
· cites it 3× “1, 1997), now recodified as 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951. 2 . Deviation from child support guidelines was governed by 19 M.”
Dow v. Adams, 1998 ME 48 (Me. 1998).
· cites it 2× “See 19-A M.R.S.A § 951 (1998). The fact of remarriage does not shift the burden to the remarried spouse to justify the continuation of alimony.”
Melanson v. Matheson, 1998 ME 117 (Me. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Once the parties’ marital assets were divided, the court should have then determined whether either party should receive alimony pursuant to the statutory criteria now found at 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1998). 2 In determining ali *149 mony, the court considers, inter alia, all…”
Sewall v. Saritvanich, 1999 ME 46 (Me. 1999).
“1, 1997), codified as 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951(1)(A) (1998), Saritvanich’s relatively young age, see id.”
Day v. Day, 1998 ME 194 (Me. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Because the divorce decree reflects the court’s consideration of all of the relevant statutory factors, see 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1998), once a separation agreement is incorporated into the divorce decree, it is the intent of the divorce court, rather than that of the parties,…”
Fitzpatrick v. Fitzpatrick, 2006 ME 140 (Me. 2006).
“Prior to 2000, the spousal support statute provided that a court could, “by full or partial agreement of the parties or otherwise,” award spousal support “that may not be *400 increased regardless of subsequent events or conditions.”
Abby L. King v. Thomas E. King, 2013 ME 56 (Me. 2013).
“In the alternative, the court may consider modifying its award of reimbursement support pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 951 — A(2)(C) (2012). Finally, upon a finding of contempt for a violation of the preliminary injunction, see 19-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(1) — 5 cases
Dargie v. Dargie, 2001 ME 127 (Me. 2001).
“[¶ 27] The District Court's authority with respect to spousal support determinations was governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951, [3] the statute then in effect.”
Largay v. Largay, 2000 ME 108 (Me. 2000).
“[¶ 12] The trial court’s authority with respect to spousal support is governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1997). 1 The factors a court considers when determining an award of spousal support are set forth in section 951(l)(A)-(0).”
Spencer v. Spencer, 1998 ME 252 (Me. 1998).
“19-A M.R.S.A. § 951(1) (1998). 3 . When the Superior Court acts as an intermediate appellate court, the Law Court reviews the decision of the trial court directly.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(1)(A) — 1 case
Sewall v. Saritvanich, 1999 ME 46 (Me. 1999).
“1, 1997), codified as 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951(1)(A) (1998), Saritvanich’s relatively young age, see id.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(4) — 4 cases
Patricia Mae Voter v. Dexter R. Voter, 2015 ME 11 (Me. 2015).
“[¶ 4] In May 2018, Dexter filed a motion to modify the amount of his spousal support obligation pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 951(4) (2014), alleging a change of circumstances because he is no longer employed.”
Spencer v. Spencer, 1998 ME 252 (Me. 1998).
“19-A M.R.S.A. § 951(1) (1998). 3 . When the Superior Court acts as an intermediate appellate court, the Law Court reviews the decision of the trial court directly.”
Day v. Day, 1998 ME 194 (Me. 1998).
“Because the divorce decree reflects the court’s consideration of all of the relevant statutory factors, see 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1998), once a separation agreement is incorporated into the divorce decree, it is the intent of the divorce court, rather than that of the parties,…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(6) — 3 cases
Largay v. Largay, 2000 ME 108 (Me. 2000).
“[¶ 12] The trial court’s authority with respect to spousal support is governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951 (1997). 1 The factors a court considers when determining an award of spousal support are set forth in section 951(l)(A)-(0).”
Fitzpatrick v. Fitzpatrick, 2006 ME 140 (Me. 2006).
“Prior to 2000, the spousal support statute provided that a court could, “by full or partial agreement of the parties or otherwise,” award spousal support “that may not be *400 increased regardless of subsequent events or conditions.”
Hedrich v. Hedrich, 1998 ME 248 (Me. 1998).
“1, 1997), now recodified as 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951. 2 . Deviation from child support guidelines was governed by 19 M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(i)(E) — 1 case
Dargie v. Dargie, 2001 ME 127 (Me. 2001).
“[¶ 27] The District Court's authority with respect to spousal support determinations was governed by 19-A M.R.S.A. § 951, [3] the statute then in effect.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 951(l) — 1 case
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.