Simpson v. Simpson

Summary

The court held that the separation agreement was ambiguous as to whether the defendant’s additional child support and alimony obligations applied to bonus and profit-sharing income after accounting for his base draw and the $700,000 cap. Because both parties advanced reasonable interpretations grounded in the agreement’s language, the issue required factual determination of the parties’ intent based on extrinsic evidence. The court also rejected judicial estoppel because the plaintiff’s positions were not clearly inconsistent, the trial court had not relied on her earlier position, and the defendant suffered no unfair prejudice.