- 4 -
1989, petitioners entered into a stipulation which was
incorporated into a temporary order dated March 13, 1989
(temporary order). The temporary order provided that Mr. Ambrose
was to pay Ms. Ambrose "the sum of $17,500 per month as family
support". Ms. Ambrose understood that the payments were being
made to provide financial support for her and the children.
After the issuance of the temporary order, Mr. Ambrose was no
longer available as a source for expenses in excess of the
$17,500 monthly payment, and he also ceased paying the children
their allowances.
On or about February 9, 1990, Ms. Ambrose filed for a
modification of the temporary order seeking an increase in the
$17,500 monthly payments. In its memorandum of opinion filed
July 3, 1990, the Superior Court denied Ms. Ambrose's motion to
increase the monthly payments.5 The Superior Court indicated its
unsolicited views suggesting how the undesignated payments might
be broken down.
[Ms. Ambrose's] * * * motion to modify * * * [the
temporary] order is denied. Because "family support"
is allowed only by stipulation, the court does need to
inquire if Ms. Ambrose, wishes the $17,500 amount
broken down into child support and spousal support. If
she does, I propose that it be broken down to $8,000
5 The parties' stipulations refer both to a memorandum of
opinion dated June 29, 1990, and an order dated July 3, 1990, by
the Superior Court. However, the record only reflects a
"Memorandum Of Opinion" which is dated as filed July 3, 1990.
Hence, we assume that the June 1990 memorandum of opinion and the
July 1990 order are one and the same.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011