In re the Marriage of Fellows

Court of Appeals of Oregon

In re the Marriage of Fellows

862 P.2d 1325, 124 Or. App. 476, 1993 Ore. App. LEXIS 1886

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedNovember 17, 1993

Docket8901731 CV; CA A74898

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 862 P.2d 1325 (In re the Marriage of Fellows) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Marriage of Fellows, 862 P.2d 1325, 124 Or. App. 476, 1993 Ore. App. LEXIS 1886 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

WARREN, P. J.

Wife appeals from a modification of a dissolution judgment that denied her permanent spousal support. On de novo review, we modify the judgment.

The parties were married for 25 years, and their marriage was dissolved by a stipulated judgment in April, 1990. The judgment ordered husband to pay spousal support of $250 per month for 24 months. In 1991, wife moved to modify the judgment, requesting an award of permanent spousal support because of an unexpected deterioration of her health. The trial court extended the spousal support for an additional six months. Wife assigns error to the trial court’s failure to make the award permanent.

Both parties argue about whether there has been a substantial change in circumstances that would warrant a modification of the dissolution judgment. At the time of the dissolution, wife acknowledged that she had osteoporosis and that she did not know how much longer she could work. After the dissolution, wife’s condition unexpectedly became much more severe. The osteoporosis spread and she had to have surgery on one foot to relieve her symptoms. Her expenditures for prescription medication have increased significantly. Nothing in the record suggests that her condition will improve. Wife’s ability to continue working is in doubt. On de novo review, we conclude wife has shown a substantial unanticipated change of circumstances and that the award of spousal support should be made indefinite.

Reversed and remanded for entry of modified judgment awarding indefinite spousal support to wife of $250 per month. Costs to wife.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WARREN, P. J.

Wife appeals from a modification of a dissolution judgment that denied her permanent spousal support. On de novo review, we modify the judgment.

The parties were married for 25 years, and their marriage was dissolved by a stipulated judgment in April, 1990. The judgment ordered husband to pay spousal support of $250 per month for 24 months. In 1991, wife moved to modify the judgment, requesting an award of permanent spousal support because of an unexpected deterioration of her health. The trial court extended the spousal support for an additional six months. Wife assigns error to the trial court’s failure to make the award permanent.

Both parties argue about whether there has been a substantial change in circumstances that would warrant a modification of the dissolution judgment. At the time of the dissolution, wife acknowledged that she had osteoporosis and that she did not know how much longer she could work. After the dissolution, wife’s condition unexpectedly became much more severe. The osteoporosis spread and she had to have surgery on one foot to relieve her symptoms. Her expenditures for prescription medication have increased significantly. Nothing in the record suggests that her condition will improve. Wife’s ability to continue working is in doubt. On de novo review, we conclude wife has shown a substantial unanticipated change of circumstances and that the award of spousal support should be made indefinite.

Reversed and remanded for entry of modified judgment awarding indefinite spousal support to wife of $250 per month. Costs to wife.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

862 P.2d 1325, 124 Or. App. 476, 1993 Ore. App. LEXIS 1886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-marriage-of-fellows-orctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack