If you only remember one point about spousal maintenance in Arizona, remember this: Arizona calls it spousal maintenance. No statewide formula. After eligibility under § 25-319(A), courts weigh statutory factors including duration of marriage, earning ability, contributions as a homemaker, and excessive spending. Forms include Temporary (pendente lite) and post-decree maintenance; awards may be rehabilitative or longer-term depending on the record.. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319. Duration: Duration is discretionary and often tied to marriage length and the time needed for the recipient to become self-sufficient. Termination: Death of either party, remarriage of the recipient, or expiration of the ordered term, unless the decree provides otherwise.
Types of spousal maintenance in Arizona
Temporary (pendente lite) and post-decree maintenance; awards may be rehabilitative or longer-term depending on the record.
Labeling matters. Rehabilitative awards usually require a plan (schooling, retraining, re-entry to the workforce). Durational or term awards run for a fixed period. Lump-sum or reimbursement awards may be non-modifiable depending on the judgment language and statute.
Walking through Arizona facts
Use this walkthrough to see which Arizona authority does the work at each step.
One spouse asks a Arizona court for spousal maintenance after a divorce filing.
- Use the label and statute Arizona actually uses: spousal maintenance under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319.
- There is no formula. Apply the statutory factors: No statewide formula. After eligibility under § 25-319(A), courts weigh statutory factors including duration of marriage, earning ability, contributions as a homemaker, and excessive spending.
- Set duration from Arizona rules: Duration is discretionary and often tied to marriage length and the time needed for the recipient to become self-sufficient.
- Identify what ends the award: Death of either party, remarriage of the recipient, or expiration of the ordered term, unless the decree provides otherwise.
Limited. Indefinite awards are exceptional and usually require a long marriage and lasting inability to become self-supporting. Fault: Marital misconduct is not a listed maintenance factor, though related financial waste can matter. Post-2018 federal decrees: maintenance is not federally deductible or includible. Arizona generally conforms for state tax purposes on those payments.
How amount is set
Arizona does not use a statewide calculator for final spousal maintenance. Judges weigh the statutory factors and the record. Online “alimony calculators” are at best rough illustrations and are not controlling.
Temporary support while a divorce is pending often follows different local practices or guidelines than the final award. Confirm what your county or division actually uses.
How long spousal maintenance lasts
Duration is discretionary and often tied to marriage length and the time needed for the recipient to become self-sufficient.
Permanent / indefinite support. Limited. Indefinite awards are exceptional and usually require a long marriage and lasting inability to become self-supporting.
When spousal maintenance ends or can be changed
Death of either party, remarriage of the recipient, or expiration of the ordered term, unless the decree provides otherwise.
Either party may usually seek modification upon a substantial change in circumstances unless the award was expressly made non-modifiable. Retirement, disability, remarriage, cohabitation, and large income swings are frequent triggers — but the statutory test and burden of proof are Arizona-specific.
Taxes
Post-2018 federal decrees: maintenance is not federally deductible or includible. Arizona generally conforms for state tax purposes on those payments.
Child support remains non-deductible and non-taxable. Do not assume spousal maintenance treatment mirrors child support.
Case law: how Arizona courts decide spousal maintenance
These LawDiver opinions illustrate how Arizona appellate courts discuss need, ability to pay, duration, and related issues:
In Re the Marriage of Gail E. MacMILLAN, Petitioner/Appellant, v. William C. SCHWARTZ, Respondent/Appellee
…ncipal and interest before he or she is eligible to receive spousal support. See, e.g., Wineinger v. Wineinger, 137 Ariz. 194, 669 P.2d 971 (App.1983). Here, the trial court found that Wife has substantial earnings from employment, interest from investments, and full health insurance benefits, in addition to the 401(k) matching contributions. We thus find no error. 3. Relevant…
Arizona opinions such as In Re the Marriage of Gail E. MacMILLAN, Petitioner/Appellant, v. William C. SCHWARTZ, Respondent/Appellee are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "See, e.g., Wineinger v. Wineinger, 137 Ariz. 194, 669 P.2d 971 (App.1983). Here, the trial court found that Wife has substantial earnings from employment, interest from investments, and full health insurance benefits, in addition to the 401(k) matching contributions." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re the Marriage of Maria FUENTES, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Hector FUENTES, Respondent-Appellant
…vorce laws ---- ‘[questions of financial support, including spousal support, child support and spousal maintenance, are to be determined in the dissolution proceedings on the basis of the status and needs of the parties at the time of the dissolution, and not marital misconduct.’ ”) (quoting Marce v. Bailey, 130 Ariz. 443, 445, 636 P.2d 1225, 1227 (App.1979)). Fault may only be…
Arizona opinions such as In Re the Marriage of Maria FUENTES, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Hector FUENTES, Respondent-Appellant are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "Marce v. Bailey, 130 Ariz. 443, 445, 636 P.2d 1225, 1227 (App.1979))." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In re the Marriage of Cheryl WALSH v. E. Jeffrey WALSH
In re the Marriage of Cheryl WALSH v. E. Jeffrey WALSH, 230 Ariz. 486 (2012)
…al’s earning capacity that may affect property division and alimony. On the other hand, enterprise goodwill, which is wholly attributable to the business itself, is subject to equitable distribution.”). ¶ 23 Husband further argues that “personal goodwill” is realized through future earnings and is accounted for in spousal maintenance. We disagree. Although the Court of Appeals…
In re the Marriage of Cheryl WALSH v. E. Jeffrey WALSH is worth reading on Arizona spousal maintenance because the court put the point in its own words: "On the other hand, enterprise goodwill, which is wholly attributable to the business itself, is subject to equitable distribution.”). ¶ 23 Husband further argues that “personal goodwill” is realized through future earnings and is accounted for in spousal maintenance. We disagree." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In Re the Marriage of Harold R. SCHROEDER, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Bernadine Marie SCHROEDER, Respondent/Appellee
…this court limited the superior court’s power to modify an alimony allowance in some situations. The case of Cummings v. Lockwood, 84 Ariz. 335, 327 P.2d 1012 (1958), addressed a decree that awarded alimony installments of $75 per month “for a period of six (6) months only.” Two days before the last payment was due, the wife sought a modification of the alimony award, includin…
In Re the Marriage of Harold R. SCHROEDER, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Bernadine Marie SCHROEDER, Respondent/Appellee is worth reading on Arizona spousal maintenance because the court put the point in its own words: "The case of Cummings v. Lockwood, 84 Ariz. 335, 327 P.2d 1012 (1958), addressed a decree that awarded alimony installments of $75 per month “for a period of six (6) months only." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Wilma E. LINDSAY, Appellant, v. Walter L. LINDSAY, Appellee
Wilma E. LINDSAY, Appellant, v. Walter L. LINDSAY, Appellee, 115 Ariz. 322 (1977)
…purpose of providing for a gross and unmodifiable amount of alimony was said to be “to define and fix with finality the scope of the rights and obligations of the parties ... so that ties between them can be completely severed and they can face with certainty the measure of the final adjustment which they will be required to make.” (Citing and quoting from Ziegenbein v. Damme,…
Practitioners open Wilma E. LINDSAY, Appellant, v. Walter L. LINDSAY, Appellee when Arizona spousal maintenance turns on the distinction in this sentence: "purpose of providing for a gross and unmodifiable amount of alimony was said to be “to define and fix with finality the scope of the rights and obligations of the parties ... so that ties between them can be completely severed and they can face with certainty the measure of the f" Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Marion E. NACE, Appellant, v. Harry L. NACE, Jr., Appellee
Marion E. NACE, Appellant, v. Harry L. NACE, Jr., Appellee, 107 Ariz. 411 (1971)
…is an appeal of an order of the Superior Court terminating alimony. The pertinent facts are that the appellant, Marion E. Nace, was granted a divorce from the appellee, Harry L. Nace, Jr., in 1966. 1 The divorce decree provided that Nace was to pay a substantial monthly sum of alimony. In November, 1967, Mrs. Nace (whom we will .refer to as Marion) suffered a “nervous breakdow…
Practitioners open Marion E. NACE, Appellant, v. Harry L. NACE, Jr., Appellee when Arizona spousal maintenance turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Superior Court terminating alimony. The pertinent facts are that the appellant, Marion E. Nace, was granted a divorce from the appellee, Harry L. Nace, Jr., in 1966. 1 The divorce decree provided that Nace was to pay a substantial monthly sum of alimony. In November, 1967, Mrs." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
In Re the MARRIAGE OF Donald Edward HINKSTON, Petitioner/Appellant, and Leola Jean Hinkston, Respondent/Appellee
…al $125.00 per month to sustain herself. Nor can additional alimony be predicated on mere hopes and speculative expectations. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 93 Ariz. 252, 379 P.2d 966 (1963); Lindsay v. Lindsay, supra. We therefore strike that portion of the decree requiring appellant to pay maintenance of $125.00 per month if appellee becomes employed. Since we find that the employment o…
In Re the MARRIAGE OF Donald Edward HINKSTON, Petitioner/Appellant, and Leola Jean Hinkston, Respondent/Appellee is worth reading on Arizona spousal maintenance because the court put the point in its own words: "Nor can additional alimony be predicated on mere hopes and speculative expectations. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 93 Ariz. 252, 379 P.2d 966 (1963); Lindsay v. Lindsay, supra. We therefore strike that portion of the decree requiring appellant to pay maintenance of $125." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In Re the Marriage of Scarlet CHOPIN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Marc C. CHOPIN, Defendant/Appellee
…r of Opposite Sex as Affecting Other Spouse's Obligation of Alimony or Support Under Separation Agreement, 47 A.L.R.4th 38 (1986 & Cum.Supp.) (analyzing cases regarding whether a divorced or separated spouse’s cohabitation with a person of the opposite sex modifies or terminates spousal support). 2 ¶ 19 We hold, however, that unless the parties specifically define the term diff…
Arizona opinions such as In Re the Marriage of Scarlet CHOPIN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Marc C. CHOPIN, Defendant/Appellee are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "Opposite Sex as Affecting Other Spouse's Obligation of Alimony or Support Under Separation Agreement, 47 A.L.R.4th 38 (1986 & Cum.Supp." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Practical checklist
- Identify the correct statutory label (spousal maintenance) and controlling section (Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319).
- Assemble income, budget, and health evidence for both spouses.
- For rehabilitative requests, prepare a concrete plan and timeline.
- Address fault only if Arizona law makes it relevant to eligibility or amount.
- Search LawDiver for recent Arizona decisions before mediation.
- Cross-check child support interactions via the Arizona child support guide.
Key takeaways
- Arizona uses the term spousal maintenance under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319.
- Amount and duration are largely discretionary, guided by statutory factors. No statewide formula. After eligibility under § 25-319(A), courts weigh statutory factors including duration of marriage, earning ability, contributions as a homemaker, and excessive spending.
- Common forms include: Temporary (pendente lite) and post-decree maintenance; awards may be rehabilitative or longer-term depending on the record.
- Duration framework: Duration is discretionary and often tied to marriage length and the time needed for the recipient to become self-sufficient.
- Permanent / indefinite support: Limited. Indefinite awards are exceptional and usually require a long marriage and lasting inability to become self-supporting.
- Companion child-support guide: Arizona child support guidelines.
What spousal maintenance is (and is not)
Spousal maintenance is court-ordered support from one spouse to the other after separation or divorce. It is separate from child support (see Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-320, 25-320.01; Arizona Child Support Guidelines) and from property division. A single judgment may include all three, but each has its own legal tests.
No spouse is automatically entitled to spousal maintenance. Courts typically ask whether one party has a genuine need and whether the other has the ability to pay, then apply Arizona's statutory framework.
Eligibility and statutory factors
No statewide formula. After eligibility under § 25-319(A), courts weigh statutory factors including duration of marriage, earning ability, contributions as a homemaker, and excessive spending.
Fault. Marital misconduct is not a listed maintenance factor, though related financial waste can matter.
Document income, earning capacity, health, length of marriage, contributions as homemaker or to the other spouse's career, and the marital standard of living. Those facts drive both temporary (pendente lite) and final awards.
Frequently asked questions
Does Arizona still award permanent spousal maintenance?
Limited. Indefinite awards are exceptional and usually require a long marriage and lasting inability to become self-supporting.
How is spousal maintenance calculated in Arizona?
Arizona leaves amount largely to judicial discretion under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319, guided by statutory factors rather than a mandatory statewide calculator.
How long do I have to be married to receive spousal maintenance?
Duration is discretionary and often tied to marriage length and the time needed for the recipient to become self-sufficient. Short marriages rarely produce long-term awards; longer marriages support broader remedies where the statute allows.
Does remarriage or cohabitation end spousal maintenance?
Death of either party, remarriage of the recipient, or expiration of the ordered term, unless the decree provides otherwise.
Is spousal maintenance taxable?
Post-2018 federal decrees: maintenance is not federally deductible or includible. Arizona generally conforms for state tax purposes on those payments.
Where can I read Arizona spousal maintenance opinions?
Open the cases linked above or search LawDiver scoped to Arizona. For support of children, see the Arizona child support guidelines guide.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information about Arizona spousal maintenance and is not legal advice. Confirm the current text of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-319 and consult a licensed Arizona family-law attorney before acting on any rule described here.