Only if the remarriage is legally valid! In Marriage of Left, 208 Cal.App 4th 1137, 146, Mr. Left married Andrea Left in June 2001 but the marriage and Andrea filed for divorce by 2005. As part of their settlement agreement, Mr. Left was to pay $14,590 a month for child support and $32,547 for spousal support. The court entered a judgment as to marital status on June 3, 2008, but reserved jurisdiction over the remaining issues.
In 2008 Andrea got engaged to Mr. Katzman and set a wedding date in May 2009. As the date approached Andrea realized the remaining issues in her dissolution would not be determined by May 2009. Since they had already committed emotionally, socially, and financially, the couple decided to go forward with a commitment ceremony which appeared to be a wedding but they did not obtain a marriage license. Andrea told Mr. Left that she had not legally married Mr. Katzman in June 2009.
After learning of the commitment ceremony, Mr. Left filed an application to terminate spousal support and for modification of the spousal and child support orders, claiming that his former wife remarried her partner in a commitment ceremony which invokes Family Code, Section 4337 – the code section that terminates spousal support upon remarriage of the supported party. The court denied his application and issued its decision, finding that Andrea had not remarried, but her cohabiting with Katzman was grounds for reducing spousal support to $20,000 a month. Mr. Left appealed.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s denial of the application for termination of spousal support. The appellate court determined that the term “remarriage” as stated under Family Code, Section 4337, only applied to a legal remarriage. This marriage was not a legal marriage not only because the parties did not obtain a marriage license, but also because the parties did not intend for this commitment ceremony to mean that they were actually married.
Left provided no authority that the term “remarriage” as used in Section 4337 means anything other than a remarriage carried out in conformity with the statutory requirements. Andrea had neither intended nor attempted to marry, did not obtain a marriage license, and did not comply with the statutory requirements for a legal marriage; thus, the application was properly denied.
For more information about support and other family law matters, contact the Reape-Rickett Law Firm at 661-288-1000. They are located at 25152 Springfield Court, Suite 100 in Valencia.