- 6 -
last requirement, that is, whether Ray would be liable to make
the payments for any period after Linda's death.
Ray and Linda could have expressly provided for the effect
of her death upon his liability to make the payments otherwise
provided for in paragraph 5 of the agreement, but for whatever
reason, they did not. They now disagree as to what was intended
by that paragraph.
According to Linda, as long as the children resided in the
marital home, Ray would be required to make the payments
regardless of whether she was dead or alive. Linda further
argues that Ray's obligation to make the payments was part and
parcel of the property settlement between them and on that ground
should not be considered alimony.
Ray and respondent disagree with Linda on both points. They
argue that if Linda died, Ray's obligation to make the payments
would terminate because, obviously, she would no longer be living
in the marital home. They further contend that the payments were
not part of the property settlement but for the support of Linda.
The language of paragraph 5 of the agreement is susceptible
to different interpretations because of the use of the word "and"
both in the sentence that establishes Ray's obligation to make
the payments ("[Ray] will pay the remaining indebtedness on [the
marital home]* * * provided that * * * Linda and the * * *
children continue to live therein"), as well as in the sentence
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011