Background
Lorraine Sauve and Gary Budd divorced in 2018 after nearly 15 years of marriage. The family court awarded Sauve equitable distribution that included the present value of Budd’s defined-benefit pension, requiring Budd to pay $1,485.28 monthly for 72 months. It also ordered spousal support of $400 monthly for 12 months, then $250 monthly, subject to continuing judicial modification and terminating upon Sauve’s remarriage or either party’s death.
In 2025, Sauve sought to hold Budd in contempt, alleging he stopped paying spousal support in August 2022 after retiring and missed two equitable-distribution payments. The family court denied the petition, finding that support ended at retirement, that Budd had paid the disputed equitable-distribution amount, and that Sauve was entitled to a marital share of Budd’s federal pension but had not filed documents needed to divide it.
The Court’s Holding
The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the finding that Budd made all required equitable-distribution payments. The complete payment record showed 72 payments and supported the family court’s conclusion.
But the court held that the family court misread the 2018 divorce order by treating Budd’s retirement as automatically ending spousal support. The divorce court had awarded Sauve the pension’s present value as equitable distribution, thereby avoiding a later division of pension benefits, and it had stated that support was only likely to end at retirement because support remained subject to judicial modification. The appellate court vacated the contrary pension and support findings and remanded for findings and conclusions on whether Budd was in contempt for failing to pay support from August 2022 forward.
Key Takeaways
- A statement that support is “likely to terminate” upon retirement does not itself create automatic termination when the order makes support subject to modification.
- A present-value pension award in equitable distribution does not entitle the recipient to a later share of the pension as an alternate payee.
- On remand, the family court must determine whether Budd’s post-August 2022 nonpayment supports contempt.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the importance of reading divorce orders according to their operative terms. Retirement may justify seeking modification of support, but it does not end support automatically unless the order actually so provides.
It also distinguishes a present-value pension offset from deferred distribution through a pension-order mechanism, preserving the intended disentanglement of divorcing parties.