Alimony Awards in Pennsylvania Divorce Cases

What is the purpose of alimony? Generally speaking, the courts award alimony to one spouse when they cannot support themselves with their own finances. This buys the spouse time to become financially viable on their own. It is not, for example, to be used as punishment for marital misconduct or to “repay” the spouse for past contributions to the marriage. In this article, the Philadelphia, PA, divorce lawyers at the Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane will discuss the case of Hodge v. Hodge (513 Pa. 264, 520 A.2d 15 (Pa. 1986)) in which an alimony award was a major factor.

Background of the case

In this case, Mr. and Mrs. Hodge married in 1966. During their marriage, the wife financially supported the household while the husband pursued a career in medicine and was in medical school, doing residency training. After he became a physician, the marriage deteriorated, and divorce proceedings began.

During the trial, the wife sought alimony on the grounds that she had sacrificed her own career opportunities to support her husband’s education and professional development. She argued that she should be reimbursed for her contributions vis-à-vis ongoing support obligations. In this case, the trial court did actually award her alimony on that basis, but the husband appealed. Ultimately, this case made it before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The question then became: Is alimony in Pennsylvania meant to serve as reimbursement for one spouse’s contributions to the other spouse’s career and education, or is it limited to addressing current and ongoing financial need after divorce?

The appeal 

In this case, the Supreme Court analyzed the newly enacted Divorce Code of 1980, specifically 23 P.a.C.S § 3701, which governs alimony. The Court highlighted two key principles:

• Alimony is based on necessity, not entitlement – According to the statute, courts can only award alimony if it is “necessary” to ensure that the dependent spouse’s reasonable needs are met.
• Alimony is rehabilitative, not punitive or compensatory – Ultimately, the Court rejected the notion that alimony serves as a payback for sacrifices that were made during the marriage. Instead, the goal is to help the dependent spouse transition toward self-support, when possible, and to avoid unfair economic hardship after equitable distribution of the marital estate.

In this case, the Court explained that claims of “reimbursement alimony” are inconsistent with the statutory framework. Economic sacrifices are already accounted for in equitable distribution under § 3502, where courts consider each party’s contributions to the marriage, including homemaking and financial sacrifices.

Talk to a Philadelphia, P.A., Divorce Lawyer Today

The Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane represent the interests of Philadelphia residents during their divorce. Call our Philadelphia family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.