Supreme Court rules alimony can't be withheld as a punishment

Nevada's Supreme Court ruled unanimously Friday that a divorce court can't deny a woman alimony to punish her for infidelity.

In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Deborah Agosti, the court ordered Clark County District Judge Terrance Marren to set a just amount for alimony for Glenda Rodriquez saying alimony "is not a sword to level the wrongdoer."

Marren's February 1997 decision granted her husband Antonio a divorce and custody of their daughter but denied her alimony despite the fact he earned far more than she did and the couple had been married more than 21 years.

He earned more than $75,000 a year and she just $14,000 a year at the time of the divorce.

As part of that decision, Marren ruled she was "more at fault for the divorce than the plaintiff by her abandonment of the marital home and children and her admitted involvement in an extramarital relationship prior to the separation of the parties."

The high court ruled that Marren's ruling violates the intent of Nevada's "no fault" divorce system. A 1993 amendment to that law, the opinion says, "reflects the Legislature's intention that as a no-fault divorce state, the fault or bad conduct of a party should not be considered when deciding the issues of alimony and community property division."

"Alimony is to be awarded according to principles of what is 'just and equitable,'" the opinion says.

"In this case, the trial judge abused his discretion when he considered Glenda's extra-marital affair in determining that she should not receive alimony," the opinion says. "given the gross disparity between the parties' incomes, Glenda was obviously being punished for her affair. Alimony is not a sword to level the wrongdoer. Alimony is not a prize to reward virtue. Alimony is financial support paid from one spouse to the other whenever justice and equity require it."