LAW AND THE FAMILY Termination of Maintenance Provisions Joel R. Brandes April 6, 1998 A SEPARATION AGREEMENT, stipulation of settlement, matrimonial agreement or "opting-out" agreement are to be construed just like any other agreement, considering the ordinary principles of contract interpretation. The interpretation is measured by the understanding of the parties as expressed in the agreement. Where the terms of an agreement are clear, and only one reasonable interpretation can be given, that construction will be adopted. The Court of Appeals has held that such agreements should be given a strict, rather than a broad, construction insofar as it may tend to limit the rights of the recipient. A valid remarriage terminates a former spouse's maintenance obligation. The parties may, however, agree that "maintenance" shall continue despite a spouses remarriage. The parties are also free to contract that support obligations survive the death of either of them, that the estate of the obligor, for example, shall be liable for the obligation or that the estate of the recipient, shall continue to receive the payments. Total Context In the Court of Appeals found that the support payments under a Cohen v. Cronin separation agreement were a charge against the husband's estate, where the agreement provided for support payments to the wife "until she shall remarry or expire," without any qualifying language. The court implied an intention to have the obligation survive the husband's death from the surrounding circumstances, including the wife's waiver of all other rights in her husband's estate and her assumption of the expenses for maintenance of the family home. held that in order to bind the estate, the agreement must evince, from the terms of Cohen the agreement read as a whole, a clear intention that support payments continue, notwithstanding the husband's death. The court must read the document as a whole in its total context and examine each of its provisions in order to ascertain the overriding intention of the parties. In recently decided by the Court of Appeals, the issue was whether Riconda v. Riconda, the former wife was entitled to maintenance payable out of the estate of her deceased former spouse, during her lifetime or until her remarriage. The parties' separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the parties' 1989 judgment of divorce, required the husband to make maintenance payments of $1,468 per month "until
LAW AND THE FAMILY Termination of Maintenance Provisions Joel R. Brandes April 6, 1998 A SEPARATION AGREEMENT, stipulation of settlement, matrimonial agreement or "opting-out" agreement are to be construed just like any other agreement, considering the ordinary principles of contract interpretation. The interpretation is measured by the understanding of the parties as expressed in the agreement. Where the terms of an agreement are clear, and only one reasonable interpretation can be given, that construction will be adopted. The Court of Appeals has held that such agreements should be given a strict, rather than a broad, construction insofar as it may tend to limit the rights of the recipient. A valid remarriage terminates a former spouse's maintenance obligation. The parties may, however, agree that "maintenance" shall continue despite a spouses remarriage. The parties are also free to contract that support obligations survive the death of either of them, that the estate of the obligor, for example, shall be liable for the obligation or that the estate of the recipient, shall continue to receive the payments. Total Context In Cohen v. Cronin the Court of Appeals found that the support payments under a separation agreement were a charge against the husband's estate, where the agreement provided for support payments to the wife "until she shall remarry or expire," without any qualifying language. The court implied an intention to have the obligation survive the husband's death from the surrounding circumstances, including the wife's waiver of all other rights in her husband's estate and her assumption of the expenses for maintenance of the family home. Cohen held that in order to bind the estate, the agreement must evince, from the terms of the agreement read as a whole, a clear intention that support payments continue, notwithstanding the husband's death. The court must read the document as a whole in its total context and examine each of its provisions in order to ascertain the overriding intention of the parties. In Riconda v. Riconda, recently decided by the Court of Appeals, the issue was whether the former wife was entitled to maintenance payable out of the estate of her deceased former spouse, during her lifetime or until her remarriage. The parties' separation agreement, which was incorporated but not merged into the parties' 1989 judgment of divorce, required the husband to make maintenance payments of $1,468 per month "until
termination_of_maintenance_provisions.docx