Advisory Guidelines for Spousal Maintenance in Parker, CO
Understanding Spousal Maintenance (Alimony) in Colorado
Colorado legislators have responded to the national alimony reform movement.
Alimony, referred to in Colorado as spousal maintenance, is the payment of monetary support from one spouse to the other after a divorce or legal separation. Spousal maintenance can have a serious impact on the future lifestyle and financial health of either party after a divorce. Therefore, it is extremely important for courts to properly analyze and determine whether maintenance should be awarded and, if so, in what amount and for how long.
It is important, too, for individuals engaged in spousal support matters to work closely with an attorney. Simply put, a knowledgeable and experienced lawyer can ensure that your interests are asserted — and your rights protected — at every step. To learn more, reach out to the legal team at Fuller & Ahern, P.C. We’ve helped countless individuals in Parker and throughout the Denver metro area resolve their spousal maintenance matters. We’re uniquely positioned to help you, too.
Key Developments in Colorado’s Spousal Support Guidelines
In 2013, concerned by an increasing trend in inconsistent maintenance awards among the state’s district courts, the Colorado Legislature enacted advisory maintenance guidelines to promote more consistency, fairness and equity statewide in maintenance awards.
The advisory guidelines, as detailed more fully below, instruct courts to take into account both the length of the marriage as well as the combined incomes of the parties when endeavoring to determine a potential maintenance award.
However, the advisory guideline amount is only a starting point for a court when determining whether a maintenance award is appropriate, what the amount of such an award should be and the duration, or term, of the award.
Stated another way, the guideline amount does not create a presumptive amount or term of maintenance that must be adopted by the court. Rather, when determining whether maintenance is appropriate or calculating the amount to award, a judge in Colorado still retains the ultimate discretion to determine whether an award of maintenance and the amount of such an award is “fair and equitable” under the unique factual circumstances of each case and/or whether it is appropriate to deviate up or down from the guideline amount.
It is worth noting, however, that one factor not considered by courts in Colorado is marital misconduct, as Colorado is a “no-fault” state, nor does it matter which party initiated the divorce proceedings.
-
“Very proactive and a great advocate”
- Edward B.Very proactive and a great advocate. I would recommend him for anyone needing a competent attorney.
-
“We highly recommend this firm.”
James Ahern and his staff were very knowledgeable and professional. James is a seasoned attorney who was able to look at our situation from all angles and was great in having us receive the best outcome.- Don C. -
“Highly recommend!!!”
I have worked with James Ahern and Brian Close on a few legal matters over the years. Both are extremely professional, problem solvers, and excellent communicator's and attorney's. Highly recommend!!!- Chris M. -
“James displays professionalism and top notch communication”
James Ahern is a highly competent attorney. James displays professionalism and top notch communication at all times. I highly recommend.- John L. -
“A definite 5 stars!”
- Heather L.James Ahearn assisted us with a matter and was superb. He was very thorough in his communications with us, kept us apprised of issues as they arose, and provide excellent legal representation. We would highly recommend James if you are looking for an attorney to assist you. A definite 5 stars!
-
“Working with James Ahern was the best decision I could have made”
Working with James Ahern was the best decision I could have made. When wrongfully accused, James stayed diligent to ensure justice was found and didn't stop until it was. I would highly recommend anyone needing defense to call Fuller & Ahern!- David C. -
“I will be returning to this firm should I find myself in need of representation again.”
I absolutely would recommend Fuller & Ahern to anyone in need of legal representation. Working directly with James Ahern was a pleasure. He was honest, direct and willing to fight for what was right! I will be returning to this firm should I find myself in need of representation again.- Justin S. -
“I am immensely grateful for their representation, and I would highly recommend them to anyone in need of an attorney.”
- Timmothy D.I recently had the opportunity to work with Brian Close on an incident that could have been detrimental to my personal life and career. From the onset of our first contact, Brian demonstrated the highest level of professionalism. He approached my case with meticulous attention to detail. His knowledge of the law and his ability to render support were instrumental in a positive outcome.
Brian had exceptional communication skills. He kept me informed at every stage of the process, answering emails within an hour every single time. His ability to communicate made a stressful situation much more manageable. His legal assistant was also an amazing communicator and was dedicated to ensuring the smoothest transactions possible.
Brian struck the perfect balance between being assertive and respectful to all parties in this case. His representation of me was impeccable.
I am immensely grateful for their representation, and I would highly recommend them to anyone in need of an attorney.
Guidance For State Judges
If maintenance is requested by a party in a divorce proceeding, the Colorado maintenance statute requires the judge to engage in a complex and lengthy analysis aimed at determining whether the party seeking maintenance actually requires it and whether the party from whom maintenance is sought can afford to provide the maintenance in the amount and duration requested.
First, a judge in Colorado must determine:
- Each party’s gross income
- How the marital property will be divided
- Each party’s financial resources (including income from marital and/or separate property)
- The reasonable financial need of the party requesting maintenance
Second, a judge determines whether maintenance is appropriate and what amount and term would be fair and equitable by considering:
- The guideline amount and term (if the guidelines apply to the marriage)
- All relevant factors, including 12 factors enumerated in the statute itself (such as financial resources, marital lifestyle, property division, length of marriage, age and health of the parties, and several others)
- If the potential recipient lacks sufficient property to provide for his or her needs and is unable to support him/herself through appropriate employment (or because child custody responsibility would make employment inappropriate)
A member of our team will be in touch shortly to confirm your contact details or address questions you may have.
The Advisory Guideline Calculation
If maintenance is awarded after the court has addressed the foundational issues above, the court will look to the advisory guidelines if two things are true:
- The parties were married for at least three years.
- The parties’ combined annual adjusted gross income is below $240,000.
The new guidelines enacted by the Legislature are based upon a complex formula for courts to use when calculating the guideline amount of a maintenance award.
The formula for calculating the guideline amount of an award asks judges to calculate 40 percent of the higher earning party’s monthly adjusted gross income and subtract from that 50 percent of the lower earning party’s monthly adjusted gross income. The difference will be the guideline amount, unless this amount, when added to the recipient’s gross income, is more than 40 percent of the parties’ combined monthly adjusted gross income.
Unlike the amount of maintenance, the guideline duration of a maintenance award, or term, is set out in a table in the statute itself. The table includes marriages ranging from three years to 20 years. The table calculates a term by applying a different percentage value to different marriage durations. For example, the guideline term of maintenance for a three-year (36-month) marriage would be 11 months (after the guideline percentage applicable to a three-year marriage, or 31 percent, is applied) (36 times .31).
If a marital term is less than three years or over 20, the term will not be assigned a percentage or addressed in the table specifically, but there is guidance provided to courts under the guidelines for how to determine whether maintenance is appropriate for marriages under three years and over 20 years.
Again, however, the guideline amount and term of spousal maintenance are simply guidelines for the court to look to. The court may order amounts and/or terms above or below the guidelines, within its discretion.