Utah Code 81-4-504. Modification of alimony after divorce decree
Current as of: 2024 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(1) The court has continuing jurisdiction to make substantive changes and new orders regarding alimony based on a substantial material change in circumstances not expressly stated in the divorce decree or in the findings that the court entered at the time of the divorce decree.
Terms Used In Utah Code 81-4-504
- Alimony: means financial support made to a spouse or former spouse for the support and maintenance of that spouse. See Utah Code 81-4-101
- Court: means :(2)(a) a judge; or(2)(b) a court commissioner if the court commissioner has authority to hear the matter under Section
78A-5-107 or the Utah Rules of Judicial Administration. See Utah Code 81-1-101- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
- Payor: means the party who is paying, or would pay, alimony to the other party. See Utah Code 81-4-501
(2)(2)(a) A party’s retirement is a substantial material change in circumstances that is subject to a petition to modify alimony, unless the divorce decree, or the findings that the court entered at the time of the divorce decree, expressly states otherwise.(2)(b) Subsection (2)(a) applies to a divorce decree regardless of the date on which the divorce decree was entered.(3) The court may not modify alimony or issue a new order for alimony to address needs of the recipient that did not exist at the time the decree was entered, unless the court finds extenuating circumstances that justify that action.(4) In modifying the amount of alimony, the court may not consider the income of any subsequent spouse of the payor, except that the court may consider:(4)(a) the subsequent spouse’s financial ability to share living expenses; or(4)(b) the income of a subsequent spouse if the court finds that the payor’s improper conduct justifies that consideration.