Legal Opinion · Dissent

Blaine v. Blaine

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided August 26, 1994No. 150Published

1DissentBell, Judge

The majority today holds that, upon a motion for extension of rehabilitative alimony, i. e., alimony ordered for a definite period of time, a trial court may order indefinite alimony, where, since the divorce, the income of the payor former spouse has doubled and that of the payee former spouse has not kept pace. This is an extraordinary and unwarranted proposition, given the statutory scheme promulgated by the Legislature. In order to achieve that result, the majority reaches another extraordinary, and equally unwarranted, conclusion: “the failure of the formerly dependent spouse to reach an…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Harris v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  2. Government Employees Insurance v. Insurance CommissionerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Tracey v. TraceyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  4. Cunningham v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  5. Mustafa v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API