- 9 -
Cunningham v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-474, where the Court
found a provision to be ambiguous on the issue of terminability.
That provision read as follows:
"Husband shall pay to Wife for her support and
maintenance the sum of $2,500.00 per month on the tenth
day of each month, for 142 months". [Id.; fn. ref.
omitted.]
The Court found that the provision was ambiguous because it
was unclear whether Husband's liability to pay was for 142 months
absolute or whether it was contingent on Wife's need for support
and maintenance, and therefore the Court looked to extrinsic
evidence to determine intent. In the instant case, we are faced
with no such ambiguity. To the contrary, the payments were
specifically required to be secured by petitioner.4 Furthermore,
while petitioner contends that the payments were intended to
"prop up Colleen", neither the agreement nor the addendum provide
for modification of the payments if she should become self-
sufficient before the end of 24 months. Similarly, they did not
provide for modification if Colleen's needs remained unchanged at
the end of 24 months. When the terms of the writing are clear
4 The addendum contains a provision which reads:
To secure payment of the Twenty Thousand
Dollars ($20,000.00) to Wife, Husband shall
execute a mortgage on said premises in Wife's
favor which shall be delivered to Wife
simultaneously with her delivery of the deed
to Husband. Said mortgage shall provide for
a 30 day written notice of default prior to
foreclosure.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011