Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Wrenn v. Lewis

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
818 A.2d 1005 (Me. 2003)


Facts

David Lewis (plaintiff) filed a motion to modify a divorce judgment against Cheryl Wrenn (defendant), seeking to reduce his child-support obligation and eliminate the payment of spousal support and the requirement that Lewis maintain a life-insurance policy with Wrenn as the beneficiary. The motion was based upon the anticipated loss of Lewis’s $63,000-per-year job. As a displaced textile worker, Lewis received unemployment benefits totaling approximately $14,300 per year. Lewis decided to become an airline pilot, rather than seek a management position in other manufacturing sectors in the state. The pilot-training program required only nine hours of Lewis’s time per week. The trial court found that Lewis had failed to pursue a meaningful employment search, despite the existence of several out-of-state management positions with starting salaries ranging from $40,000 to $50,000 per year. Instead of using the amount of Lewis’s unemployment benefits as the basis to calculate his income, the trial court reduced Lewis’s child-support obligation using an imputed income of $50,000 per year, based on Lewis’s ability to obtain one of the potential distant job opportunities. The trial court denied Lewis’s request to eliminate his spousal support and life and health-insurance obligations. The court reasoned that Lewis had voluntarily chosen to remain unemployed for an extended period of time without giving any consideration to his child and spousal support responsibilities. Lewis appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Levy, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.