Unreported

FRANK PATRICK SZUSTAK v. GRETCHEN SCHENK SZUSTAK

Appellant Frank Patrick Szustak appeals the Circuit Court for Cecil County’s denial of his Motion for Reconsideration of its dismissal of his Complaint for Absolute Divorce from appellee Gretchen Schenk Szustak. While this case was pending in Maryland, a Pennsylvania court entered a final decree of divorce between the same two parties and resolved the custody and property issue. Finding this case moot, we dismiss the appeal.

Read More »

DAVID MOODY v. JULIE DOBIES f/k/a JULIE MOODY

In May 2011, Julie Dobies (“Wife”), appellee, filed a complaint for a divorce from David Moody (“Husband”), appellant. The Circuit Court for Harford County conducted a bench trial on June 18–20, 2012. The evidence presented at trial showed that the couple’s finances were strained throughout the marriage, and that by late 2010, they had tens of thousands of dollars of unsecured debt that they struggled to pay. On July 31, 2012, the circuit court entered a judgment granting an absolute divorce and ordering Husband to pay $750 per month in rehabilitative alimony to Wife for a period of five years. Husband appealed the judgment to this Court, arguing, among other things, that the circuit court’s award of alimony was improper because the award was intended to force Husband to pay a portion of the couple’s debt and Wife’s attorney’s fees. This Court agreed that the circuit court’s stated rationale for awarding alimony would have been more appropriately addressed by entry of a marital award, and we remanded the case to the circuit court to reconsider the appropriate relief. On remand, the circuit court once again awarded Wife $750 per month in rehabilitative alimony for a period of five years, and Husband appealed again. QUESTIONS PRESENTED Appellant submitted four questions for our review, which we have consolidated and rephrased as follows: 1. Did the circuit court err by awarding Wife alimony in the amount of $750 per month for a period of five years? 2. Did the circuit court erroneously conclude that Husband was not entitled to a reimbursement of alimony payments already made? Because we answer each of these questions in the negative, we will affirm the judgment of the Circuit Court for Harford County.

Read More »

Theodore C. Julio v. Lisa Julio

Court properly held Appellant in contempt for failing to make installment payments as required by divorce decree, and entered judgments against him for those amounts; however, court’ should have specified that appellant could purge the contempt by paying those judgments.

Read More »

Jodi Annette Grimes v. Jay Todd Grimes

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting husband’s motion in limine to preclude a monetary award, indefinite alimony or rehabilitative alimony to wife, as her pleadings failed to request such relief and she never filed the necessary financial forms; wife’s general claim for “any relief within the Family Law Article” is not sufficiently specific, and the court cannot consider the parties’ alleged discussions during mediation as evidence of notice.

Read More »

Ann R. Thomas v. Timothy E. Thomas

Given the conflicting evidence at trial, the court was not clearly erroneous in rejecting wife’s claim of constructive desertion; the judge considered the testimony of wife and her adult children regarding husband’s alleged resumption of drugs and alcohol and the effect it had on his behavior and mood, but was not persuaded that his actions put wife in such fear for her health, safety and self-respect that she could not remain in the marriage.

Read More »

Rosibeth Molina v. Albarth Molina

The circuit properly found a gross disparity in the couple’s standards of living would justify an award of indefinite alimony, but, in determining the amount, failed to give adequate consideration to appellant’s future housing expenditures and the fact that appellee would no longer be paying the mortgage.

Read More »