Traylor v. Burns

570 A.2d 1204, 1990 Me. LEXIS 70
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedFebruary 26, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 570 A.2d 1204 (Traylor v. Burns) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Traylor v. Burns, 570 A.2d 1204, 1990 Me. LEXIS 70 (Me. 1990).

Opinion

WATHEN, Justice.

Defendant, Robert Burns, appeals from a decision of the Superior Court (Kennebee County, Brody, CJ.) affirming an order of the District Court (Augusta, Calkins, J.) denying his motion to amend a divorce decree. On appeal, defendant argues that the District Court erroneously failed to eliminate the requirement that he pay child support for his minor child so long as she receives Social Security benefits. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment.

Defendant and plaintiff, Catherine Tray-lor, were divorced and defendant was ordered to pay child support of $23.33 per week for each minor child. At all times relevant to these proceedings only one of the parties children was a minor. Defendant is unemployed and disabled and currently receives a $728 Social Security disability benefit and a $454 disability pension per month.

After the divorce the plaintiff married Emit Traylor who died after five years of marriage. As a result of Traylor’s death, the minor child became eligible to receive a greater Social Security benefit under Tray-lor’s account than she had been receiving under defendant’s Social Security disability account. The child elected to receive the higher benefit due her as Traylor’s dependent. Defendant brought a motion to amend the divorce judgment to relieve him of his child support obligation.

Essentially, defendant argues that he should be credited with the amounts received by his child as a dependent of Tray-lor because he would have been credited with any amounts that were paid had the child elected to receive the Social Security benefits due to her as his dependent. Assuming without deciding that defendant *1205 would be entitled to a credit for Social Security payments received from his account, he cites no authority from any jurisdiction for the proposition that he should receive credit for benefits earned by the stepfather of his minor child. The District Court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to amend the divorce judgment.

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

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

Related

Alan W. Dillon v. Heather Gilotti-Dillon
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 2026
Andrea E. Stockman v. Brian G. Schmidt
Missouri Court of Appeals, 2023
Norberg v. Norberg
2014 ND 90 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2014)
Ouellette v. Ouellette
687 A.2d 242 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1996)
Lake v. Lake
899 S.W.2d 737 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Marriage of Truman v. Truman
642 N.E.2d 230 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1994)
In Re the Marriage of Beacham
867 P.2d 1071 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1994)
Grunewaldt v. Bisson
494 N.W.2d 193 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
570 A.2d 1204, 1990 Me. LEXIS 70, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/traylor-v-burns-me-1990.