In the Matter of Raybeck
New Hampshire Supreme Court
44 A.3d 551 (2012)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Judith Raybeck (plaintiff) and Bruce Raybeck (defendant) were divorced in Texas after 42 years of marriage. The trial court awarded Bruce real property in North Carolina and Texas and awarded Judith a home in Laconia, New Hampshire. Additionally, the divorce decree, which was based upon an agreement between the Raybecks, required Bruce to pay Judith alimony of $25,000 per year for 10 years in annual installments. The alimony obligation would cease if Judith cohabitated with an unrelated, adult male. Subsequently, Judith moved out of her Laconia home and into the upper level of a single-family house owned by Paul Sansoucie, a man she had met through an online-dating service. Sansoucie, who lived on the lower level of the house, did not charge Judith rent. However, Judith paid about $300 per month for food. Judith and Sansoucie shared living space on the middle level of the house. Additionally, there was evidence that Judith and Sansoucie had traveled together and discussed marriage but had not actively pursued marriage. Bruce stopped the payment of alimony. Judith filed a petition asking the trial court to enforce the agreement. After a hearing, a special master recommended to the trial court that Judith was not in cohabitating with Sansoucie. The trial court agreed and ordered Bruce to continue payment of spousal support. Bruce appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lynn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.