It has been the norm, even through the most recent economic crisis, for courts to eschew claims of newly diminished income as the basis for a support award—opting instead to impute income or deny downward modification. The standard of living, even to the extent it might no longer be actually capable of being sustained, remained of paramount concern as courts tried to balance the claims of the income-producing spouse of diminished resources with the expectations and needs of the less monied spouse and the children. Of note then is the decision in S.A. v. L.A.1 where the present financial situation—far less lucrative than existed throughout the marriage—led the court to a different result than usually reported and also to caution that there was a new economic reality which would have to be accepted by the less monied spouse.
A New Economic Reality
In S.A. v. L.A., the Supreme Court, Westchester County, (albeit in considering interim spousal support) had to determine if it would apply the husband’s 2012 income of $819,049 or his far lesser annualized 2013 income imputed at $240,000. The husband was 56 years old and employed in the financial services industry. The wife was 64 years old—essentially a stay-at-home wife and mother—without substantial employment for 23 years of this long-term marriage. Much of the decision involved a discussion of the propriety of applying current income as opposed to the income on the last tax return on a presumptive temporary maintenance calculation2 in similar fashion as is available for interim child support.3 However, an issue which was found to be of great significance was the court’s view of the parties’ present diminished financial situation from the historic standard of living even as measured by the immediately preceding year.4
