Alimony Divorce Case | Salt Lake City Alimony Lawyer

The Divorce Lawyers at Arnold & Wadsworth offer a free consultation. With offices in Salt Lake City and Ogden, Utah we have divorce and family law attorneys ready to aggressively protect your rights. Below is an explanation of a recent Utah Court of Appeals case decided concerning alimony.

There was a recent case that decided and explained different types of alimony;

“Alimony awards come in different varieties. See, e.g., Wells, 871 P.2d at 1038–39 (analyzing court’s ability to award temporary alimony); Bell v. Bell, 810 P .2d 489, 493 n. 3 (Utah Ct.App.1991) (“The purpose of rehabilitative alimony is in the short run to close the gap between actual expenses and actual income to enable the receiving spouse to then be better able to support herself when the alimony and schooling end.”); Petersen v. Petersen, 737 P.2d 237, 242 n. 4 (Utah Ct.App.1987) (observing that “reimbursement” alimony is sometimes appropriate). And several of those variants are not considered permanent alimony awards. See Wells, 871 P.2d at 1039 (indicating that temporary alimony is separate and distinct from permanent alimony).”

Beal v. Beal, 2013 UT App 105
In your case you might need “transitional alimony” and the court explained the difference between transitional alimony and permanent alimony as follows;
“While the award here was not expressly characterized as a temporary award, the plain meaning of the phrase “transitional alimony” and the clear intent of the divorce decree demonstrate that the award was not meant to be permanent. “Transition” is not synonymous with permanence, but rather relates to “a passage or movement from one state, condition, or place to another.” See Webster’s Third New Int’l Dictionary 2428 (1993). Therefore, the decree’s “transitional” award is, by definition, an award that is subject to change. Within the framework of this divorce decree, which calls for an alimony review after two years and following the exchange of information that would permit the calculation of a permanent alimony award, an award intended to be reviewed and changed cannot reasonably be viewed as permanent.”

Beal v. Beal, 2013 UT App 105
As you can see from this quote from the case there are different types of alimony and you need to make sure in your divorce that the right type of alimony is given depending on your facts in your divorce case. This is both true for the man or woman in the divorce. For example, if you are the one obligated to pay alimony you need to make sure that you categorize the alimony correctly to make sure you can make it tax deductible and to make sure you are paying under correct guidelines. If you do not have both in place you are set up to fail.
Our divorce lawyers at Arnold & Wadsworth are here to provide you with the professional service you deserve. The divorce attorneys at Arnold & Wadsworth stay current on divorce laws and divorce trends. Divorce involves all facets of the law and therefore you need the divorce lawyers at Arnold & Wadsworth. Call today (801) 475-0123 for a free consultation.

Child Support in Utah | Divorce Lawyers

In Utah child support is calculated by a Child Support Table. A lot of attorneys call it a child support calculator. What some divorce lawyers in Utah forget is the child support table has a rebuttable presumption which means you can argue for higher or lesser child support. Child Support is calculated under Utah Code Annotated 78B-12-101 et al.

Under Utah Law income for child support purposes is defined as;

“Income” means earnings, compensation, or other payment due to an individual, regardless of source, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, pay, allowances, contract payment, or otherwise, including severance pay, sick pay, and incentive pay. “Income” includes:
(a) all gain derived from capital assets, labor, or both, including profit gained through sale or conversion of capital assets;
(b) interest and dividends;
(c) periodic payments made under pension or retirement programs or insurance policies of any type;
(d) unemployment compensation benefits;
(e) workers’ compensation benefits; and
(f) disability benefits.
Utah Code Ann. § 78B-12-102 (West)
Therefore, even if you are on disability benefits it can still be used toward child support calculations. We receive a lot of phone calls to our office asking if a second job can count toward child support. The answer is no. The court will usually only use one full time job. However, this does not mean that if you consistently sell and buy stocks that such income could not be used in child support calculations. But most likely those types of income will be used in calculating such things as alimony. Depending on the income bracket you and your spouse are in when you combine your incomes. It is also important that if one of the spouses does not work that they are imputed for income for child support purposes. If you do not attribute an income then child support may be more if you are only person with income.
At Arnold & Wadsworth we have divorce lawyers that can help you with offices in Salt Lake City and Ogden Utah. Our divorce lawyers in Salt Lake City and Ogden can answer your questions and help make sure you are not taken advantage of. Call today for a free consultation at (801) 475-0123.
Arnold & Wadsworth is a divorce law firm located in Salt Lake City and Ogden Utah.

Arnold & Wadsworth is a divorce law firm located in Salt Lake City and Ogden Utah.

Utah Divorce Attorneys and Lawyers – Arnold & Wadsworth — Arnold & Wadsworth

Utah Divorce Attorneys and Lawyers – Arnold & Wadsworth — Arnold & Wadsworth.

This is our latest post on our website. We are a divorce law firm. We have a team of attorneys to help you with all of your divorce needs.

Utah Divorce Attorney

Does it matter who files first – Divorce in Utah

FREE CONSULTATION (801) 475-0123


Does it really matter who files first in a Divorce in Utah?

Answer – Not Really

The only time that it really matters who files first is when your case goes to trial. The reason is the Party (person) who filed first puts their case on first, and then they can present rebuttal witnesses after the other Party (person) presents their case. So in essence they almost get two bites at the apple. Still there really is not distinct advantage to filing first.

Another advantage may be that if you file first you can control the timeline of your divorce a little more than your soon to be ex-spouse.

All of these considerations do not give the Party that files first a real “advantage”. Remember to always move your case along in Court. The reason for this is because the Courts get bogged down, and time moves by quickly.

We are Arnold & Wadsworth and we offer a free initial consultation. Give us a call today at (801) 475-0123.

Arnold & Wadsworth - Divorce Law Firm

Salt Lake City Divorce Lawyers – (801) 475-0123

FREE CONSULTATION – (801) 475-0123

Arnold & Wadsworth


The discovery rules for divorce cases in Utah are changing on November 1st. The reason this is good is because it will force both parties to be honest as it pertains to financial records. This will enable you to make better decisions when it comes to settling your divorce at mediation.

This will also enable your attorney to be more effective. When our law firm goes through the discovery process we are very thorough. We try to minimize the possibility that your spouse is hiding key assets from the divorce proceedings. However, our best asset is our clients. You need to be involved with your attorney throughout the process to better enable them to do their job. If you attorney is charging you for every little phone call, email, etc. then you need to have a talk with them about them being effective without your input. This is your divorce, therefore you need to have success. Give us a call today and see what we can do for you.

Salt Lake City Divorce Lawyers

Arnold & Wadsworth SLC Utah


Helping Clients in Salt Lake City, Ogden, Layton, Sandy, Draper, Kaysville, West Jordan, Provo, Orem, and other Utah Counties.

Divorce Law in Salt Lake City – Arnold & Wadsworth

Divorce law in Utah can be complicated and logical at the same time. At Arnold & Wadsworth we have an office in Salt Lake City in order to meet your needs. We can help you through your divorce in a timely and aggressive manner. If you and your husband or wife have agreed to certain terms of your divorce we will make sure that we incorporate what you want when we represent you. We will tell you of your rights and what possible outcomes could be, but at the end of the day the decision are yours to make. Give us a call today for a free consultation at (801) 475-0123.

Check out or Divorce Website.


Salt Lake City Divorce Lawyer – Arnold & Wadsworth

Arnold & Wadsworth Divorce Website

We know that Divorce and Family law can be stressful. We know that having an attorney that you trust and have confidence is of paramount importance. We are here to help. A major part of Arnold & Wadsworth is family law. We have different attorneys that can help with different situations. We have helped clients all over Utah. We offer a free consultation for potential clients. We want to earn your trust, take advantage of the free consultation.

Helping clients in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Davis County, Layton, Ogden, Kaysville, Bountiful, Centerville, Syracuse, West Point, Weber County, Ogden, South Ogden, Washington Terrace, Sandy, West Jordan, South Jordan, Murray, St. George, Utah, Family Law, Divorce, Custody Lawyer.

Alimony in Utah – Fault Consideration – Arnold & Wadsworth

When going through a divorce fault may be a consideration by the court. In Mark v. Mark in 2009 this was examined in a more thorough manner;

To the extent the trial court’s alimony award was a consequence of his fault, Husband argues that the trial court erred in making the alimony award. Regarding Husband’s fault, the trial court made the following finding: “Although fault is an appropriate consideration in awarding alimony in addition to the [mandatory statutory] factors, the Court is mindful of the Utah policy that the purpose of alimony is to provide support, not to reward or punish.”  Mark v. Mark, 2009 UT App 374, 223 P.3d 476, 481
This brings out a good point in that alimony should not award or punish, yet fault can be considered. The case continues;
“The trial court correctly observed that courts may consider fault in fashioning alimony awards but that “[c]onsidering the fault of a party is distinct from punishing a party based on fault.” Christiansen v. Christiansen, 2003 UT App 348U, para. 9, 2003 WL 22361312 (mem) (emphasis added); see also Davis v. Davis, 2003 UT App 282, ¶ 9 n. 1, 76 P.3d 716. However, there is also some merit to the trial court’s implicit observation that this is merely a “distinction without a difference,” see Central Fla. Invs., Inc. v. Parkwest Assocs., 2002 UT 3, ¶ 17, 40 P.3d 599. In other words, if a trial court uses its broad statutory discretion to consider fault in fashioning an alimony award and then, taking that fault into consideration, adjusts the alimony award upward or downward, it simply cannot be said that fault was not used to punish or reward either spouse by altering the award as a consequence of fault. With this legal framework in place, trial courts are left in the difficult position of trying to determine what the term “fault” means, in what context, and what, if any, consequence fault should have on an award of alimony.” Mark v. Mark, 2009 UT App 374, 223 P.3d 476, 482
Therefore if fault is brought up, you want to make sure you make the correct distinctions in either arguing against it or for it. We have experience in arguing for and against alimony during the trial process. You need someone that understands both sides of alimony so that you can be better protected and better prepare for what the other party may argue. Call today for a free consultation.

Protective Orders in Utah – Arnold & Wadsworth

Have you been abused, or do you feel that the abuse is coming back into your relationship. Do you feel like you need help from the courts or the police in order to feel safe. If you answered yes, then you might need a protective order. We have helped clients obtain protective orders, and we have defended clients who have been wrongfully accused of abuse. We have been on both sides and therefore can fully ascertain your situation. Give us a call today at (801) 475-0123.

Arnold & Wadsworth Divorce Website

Utah Statutes

78B-7-103.   Abuse or danger of abuse — Protective orders.
(1) Any cohabitant who has been subjected to abuse or domestic violence, or to whom there is a substantial likelihood of abuse or domestic violence, may seek an ex parte protective order or a protective order in accordance with this chapter, whether or not that person has left the residence or the premises in an effort to avoid further abuse.
(2) A petition for a protective order may be filed under this chapter regardless of whether an action for divorce between the parties is pending.
(3) A petition seeking a protective order may not be withdrawn without approval of the court.

78B-7-104.   Venue of action.
(1) The district court has jurisdiction of any action brought under this chapter.
(2) An action brought pursuant to this chapter shall be filed in the county where either party resides or in which the action complained of took place.

78B-7-106.   Protective orders — Ex parte protective orders — Modification of orders — Service of process — Duties of the court.
(1) If it appears from a petition for an order for protection or a petition to modify an order for protection that domestic violence or abuse has occurred or a modification of an order for protection is required, a court may:
(a) without notice, immediately issue an order for protection ex parte or modify an order for protection ex parte as it considers necessary to protect the petitioner and all parties named to be protected in the petition; or
(b) upon notice, issue an order for protection or modify an order after a hearing, whether or not the respondent appears.
(2) A court may grant the following relief without notice in an order for protection or a modification issued ex parte:
(a) enjoin the respondent from threatening to commit or committing domestic violence or abuse against the petitioner and any designated family or household member;
(b) prohibit the respondent from harassing, telephoning, contacting, or otherwise communicating with the petitioner, directly or indirectly;
(c) order that the respondent is excluded from the petitioner’s residence and its premises, and order the respondent to stay away from the residence, school, or place of employment of the petitioner, and the premises of any of these, or any specified place frequented by the petitioner and any designated family or household member;
(d) upon finding that the respondent’s use or possession of a weapon may pose a serious threat of harm to the petitioner, prohibit the respondent from purchasing, using, or possessing a firearm or other weapon specified by the court;
(e) order possession and use of an automobile and other essential personal effects, and direct the appropriate law enforcement officer to accompany the petitioner to the residence of the parties to ensure that the petitioner is safely restored to possession of the residence, automobile, and other essential personal effects, or to supervise the petitioner’s or respondent’s removal of personal belongings;
(f) grant to the petitioner temporary custody of any minor children of the parties;
(g) order the appointment of the office of the Guardian Ad Litem to represent the interests of any minor children of the parties, if abuse or neglect of the minor children is alleged, or appoint a private guardian ad litem, if appropriate, pursuant to Section 78A-2-228;
(h) order any further relief that the court considers necessary to provide for the safety and welfare of the petitioner and any designated family or household member; and
(i) if the petition requests child support or spousal support, at the hearing on the petition order both parties to provide verification of current income, including year-to-date pay stubs or employer statements of year-to-date or other period of earnings, as specified by the court, and complete copies of tax returns from at least the most recent year.
(3) A court may grant the following relief in an order for protection or a modification of an order after notice and hearing, whether or not the respondent appears:
(a) grant the relief described in Subsection (2); and
(b) specify arrangements for parent-time of any minor child by the respondent and require supervision of that parent-time by a third party or deny parent-time if necessary to protect the safety of the petitioner or child.
(4) Following the protective order hearing, the court shall:

(a) as soon as possible, deliver the order to the county sheriff for service of process;
(b) make reasonable efforts to ensure that the order for protection is understood by the petitioner, and the respondent, if present;
(c) transmit electronically, by the end of the next business day after the order is issued, a copy of the order for protection to the local law enforcement agency or agencies designated by the petitioner; and
(d) transmit a copy of the order to the statewide domestic violence network described in Section 78B-7-113.
(5) (a) Each protective order shall include two separate portions, one for provisions, the violation of which are criminal offenses, and one for provisions, the violation of which are civil violations, as follows:
(i) criminal offenses are those under Subsections (2)(a) through (e), and under Subsection (3)(a) as it refers to Subsections (2)(a) through (e); and
(ii) civil offenses are those under Subsections (2)(f), (h), and (i), and Subsection (3)(a) as it refers to Subsections (2)(f), (h), and (i).
(b) The criminal provision portion shall include a statement that violation of any criminal provision is a class A misdemeanor.
(c) The civil provision portion shall include a notice that violation of or failure to comply with a civil provision is subject to contempt proceedings.
(6) The protective order shall include:
(a) a designation of a specific date, determined by the court, when the civil portion of the protective order either expires or is scheduled for review by the court, which date may not exceed 150 days after the date the order is issued, unless the court indicates on the record the reason for setting a date beyond 150 days;
(b) information the petitioner is able to provide to facilitate identification of the respondent, such as Social Security number, driver license number, date of birth, address, telephone number, and physical description; and
(c) a statement advising the petitioner that:
(i) after two years from the date of issuance of the protective order, a hearing may be held to dismiss the criminal portion of the protective order;
(ii) the petitioner should, within the 30 days prior to the end of the two-year period, advise the court of the petitioner’s current address for notice of any hearing; and
(iii) the address provided by the petitioner will not be made available to the respondent.
(7) Child support and spouse support orders issued as part of a protective order are subject to mandatory income withholding under Title 62A, Chapter 11, Part 4, Income Withholding in IV-D Cases, and Title 62A, Chapter 11, Part 5, Income Withholding in Non IV-D Cases, except when the protective order is issued ex parte.
(8) (a) The county sheriff that receives the order from the court, pursuant to Subsection (5)(a), shall provide expedited service for orders for protection issued in accordance with this chapter, and shall transmit verification of service of process, when the order has been served, to the statewide domestic violence network described in Section 78B-7-113.
(b) This section does not prohibit any law enforcement agency from providing service of process if that law enforcement agency:
(i) has contact with the respondent and service by that law enforcement agency is possible; or

(ii) determines that under the circumstances, providing service of process on the respondent is in the best interests of the petitioner.
(9) (a) When an order is served on a respondent in a jail or other holding facility, the law enforcement agency managing the facility shall make a reasonable effort to provide notice to the petitioner at the time the respondent is released from incarceration.
(b) Notification of the petitioner shall consist of a good faith reasonable effort to provide notification, including mailing a copy of the notification to the last-known address of the victim.
(10) A court may modify or vacate an order of protection or any provisions in the order after notice and hearing, except that the criminal provisions of a protective order may not be vacated within two years of issuance unless the petitioner:
(a) is personally served with notice of the hearing as provided in Rules 4 and 5, Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, and the petitioner personally appears before the court and gives specific consent to the vacation of the criminal provisions of the protective order; or
(b) submits a verified affidavit, stating agreement to the vacation of the criminal provisions of the protective order.
(11) A protective order may be modified without a showing of substantial and material change in circumstances.
(12) Insofar as the provisions of this chapter are more specific than the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, regarding protective orders, the provisions of this chapter govern.

Divorce in Utah – Arnold & Wadsworth PLLC

We serve most of Utah from Provo to Ogden Utah. We have an office in Salt Lake City and Ogden Utah. We help people through all aspects of divorce including filing the Petition, Answering the Petition, Temporary Orders, Protective Orders, Mediation, and Trial. All aspects of a divorce present its different issues. It is always best to have an attorney that is willing to fight to protect your rights and get you what you deserve in the process. Give us a call today and see how we can help. (801) 475-0123 – Salt Lake City and Ogden Office.

Arnold & Wadsworth Divorce Website

firm pic


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 172 other followers