Preview:

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance
sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334)
229-0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made
before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2011-2012

2100616


Angela Fay Egres

v.

Michael Jon Egres


Appeal from Marion Circuit Court
(DR-09-900012.01)

BRYAN, Judge.

Angela Fay Egres ("the former wife") appeals from a

judgment entered by the Marion Circuit Court ("the trial

court") that modified the child-support obligation of Michael

Jon Egres ("the former husband") and failed to clarify certain

provisions in the settlement agreement incorporated into the
parties' divorce judgment.

The record reveals that the parties were divorced by the
trial court on or about April 22, 2009.  The divorce judgment
incorporated an agreement reached by the parties.  Pursuant to
the judgment incorporating that agreement, the parties were
purportedly awarded joint legal and physical custody of their
two children, but the former wife was designated as the
primary custodian and the former husband was awarded
visitation rights and was ordered to pay child support.  For
purposes of this appeal, the pertinent part of their agreement
states as follows:

"4.  The parties agree that the [former husband]
shall pay to the [former wife] the sum of $300 per
week to be deposited into the [former wife]'s
specified account for the support and maintenance of
the minor children.  Said child support shall
continue until the youngest minor child reaches the
age of majority or/and until the property, mobile
home, and land are paid in full. The parties
understand that they are not in compliance with Rule
32, A[la]. R. J[ud]. A[dmin].

"....
"5.  The parties agree that the [former wife]
shall have and maintain use of the marital property
located [in] ... Bear Creek ....  The parties agree
that the [former wife] shall also have all contents
of said marital home.  The parties further agree

that the [former wife] shall be responsible for the
indebtedness owed thereon.  The parties agree that
the [former husband] shall continue to pay the
amount of $300 per week until the property is paid
in full.  Said $300 per week should be deposited
into the [former wife]'s bank account by the [former
husband] each week.  The amount of $300 per week,
which will be paid by the [former husband] for child
support and the house payment, shall continue to be
paid after the children reach the age of majority,
until the said property is paid in full.  Upon
payment in full of the indebtedness owed on said
property, the [former husband] agrees to sign any
and all documents necessary in order to convey title
of the Double Wide trailer and the land located at
the above address to the [former wife].  The parties
agree that a portion of the child support agreed to
be paid by the [former husband] shall be used for
the payment on the marital residence."

(Emphasis added.)

On August 31, 2010, the former husband filed a petition

to modify his child-support obligation, alleging that a

material change in circumstances had occurred since the date

the parties' divorce judgment had been entered.  The former

husband alleged that the former marital residence had caught

on fire and had suffered a total loss, that the mortgage on

the former marital residence had been paid in full with

insurance proceeds, and that the parties' oldest child had

reached the age of majority.  The former wife filed a general

answer denying the allegations in the former husband's

modification petition, and she filed a counterclaim seeking,
among other relief not pertinent to this appeal, a
clarification of the parties' divorce judgment, an order
requiring the former husband to continue paying $300 a week
until the mortgage on her replacement home was paid in full,
and an order requiring the former husband to contribute to the
postminority educational expenses of the parties' younger
child.

The trial court conducted an ore tenus proceeding on
December 7, 2010.  On December 10, 2010, the trial court
entered an order that stated, in pertinent part: "That the
child support obligation of $300.00 per week, said obligation
being also for the mortgage payment, is due to be modified."
After finding that the former husband was voluntarily
underemployed, the trial court set the former husband's child

Download 2100616.pdf

Alabama Law