- 14 -
Ms. Ambrose contends that she could exercise her election
without formal action by the Superior Court or an explicit
declaration that she chose the suggested allocation set forth by
the court. Ms. Ambrose asserts that she expressed her wishes and
notified the Superior Court and Mr. Ambrose through her
manifestations in her attempts to increase the $17,500 monthly
payments. For example, her October 11, 1990, declaration
contains a listing of $3,325 as taxes on income of $9,500. Her
request for modification filed on October 12, 1990, shows taxes
of $3,325 on "spousal support" of $9,500. She also points to her
1989, 1990, and 1991 Federal income tax returns, which were filed
with the Superior Court. These returns report $95,000 per year
as taxable alimony, which, Ms. Ambrose states, indicates her
choice of an allocation. Furthermore, Ms. Ambrose states that
neither Mr. Ambrose nor the Superior Court objected to her use of
the allocated amounts in the documents she filed.
We do not find Ms. Ambrose's actions to be sufficient to
cause a modification of the temporary order. We cannot accept
Ms. Ambrose’s interpretation of the language of the memorandum of
opinion and the April 1991 order. The Superior Court stated:
the Court does need to inquire if * * * Ms. Ambrose
wishes the $17,500 family support amount broken down
* * *. If she does, * * * I propose that it be broken
down to $8,000 child support, $9,500 spousal support.
[Emphasis supplied.]
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011