For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here.
In re the Marriage of Hare
Thomas Hare, Petitioner-Appellant
Christina Hare, Respondent-Appellee
Attorney for Appellant
Stephen F. Avery
Attorney for Appellee
Scot L. Bauermeister
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Carl J. Petersen, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and May and Greer, JJ. Opinion by Tabor, P.J. (8 pages)
Thomas Hare challenges the district court’s award of traditional spousal support to his former wife, Christina Hare. He asks us to reduce the amount and duration of the support. OPINION HOLDS: Because the district court’s spousal support ruling is reasonable based on the length of the marriage and the disparity in the parties’ earning, we affirm. Also, ending Thomas’s alimony obligation at the point of his future retirement will ordinarily be considered to raise too many speculative issues to be considered in the initial spousal support award, so we see no reason to modify the decree. We decline to award attorney fees on appeal.