Ruud v. Ruud

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

By order of this court, Diane M. Ruud, n.k.a. Diane M. Coppens, has obtained further review of that portion of the Court of Appeals’ decision dealing with Charles A. Ruud’s spousal maintenance obligation. The majority of the panel reversed the trial court in this regard, essentially concluding that Diane’s remarriage terminated Charles’ obligation to make a $10,000 payment due according to the terms of the judgment and decree on May 15, 1984. Ruud v. Ruud, 372 N.W.2d 851 (Minn.App.1985). We reverse in part and reinstate the decision of the trial court.

At the time of the…