Keith M. Rustand, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Elizabeth L. Rustand, Defendant and Appellant

Summary

The court held that the monthly payment labeled “alimony, support and maintenance” could not be terminated solely because Elizabeth remarried without first determining what portion represented property distribution, permanent spousal support, rehabilitative support, or child support. Because the divorce record lacked a comprehensive listing and valuation of the marital property, the court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing and specific characterization of the payment. The court also directed the trial court to determine whether extraordinary circumstances justified continuing any portion classified as permanent spousal support despite remarriage.