Christopher Foster, Appellant v. Leah Foster, Appellee — Brill, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Brill, dissenting, concluded that the alimony award was permanent-support alimony improperly labeled as rehabilitative alimony because it lacked a court-established rehabilitative plan, recipient requirements, and a meaningful connection to self-support. He would have treated the award as permanent alimony rather than affirming it as rehabilitative. Justice Wood, concurring in part and dissenting in part, likewise would reverse and remand the alimony award but would affirm the attorney's-fee award.