Kunkle v. Kunkle

I dissent from the majority’s *74holding in paragraph one of the syllabus because it unnecessarily restricts a trial court’s discretion to award permanent alimony. In addition I dissent from the majority’s application of syllabus two to the facts of this case. However, I agree that in a charge against the payor spouse’s estate, the sum must be definite or cease on a date certain. Thus, because the amount of alimony awarded in this case is not for a definite amount or for a fixed period of time, it is not permissible to make it a charge against the appellant’s estate.

This court has stated…