Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Alimony topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee votes ITL on bill that would largely eliminate alimony in no-fault divorces
Summary
Representative Barton said HB 325 would bar term and reimbursement alimony in divorces granted on grounds of irreconcilable differences (no-fault).
Representative Barton, the bill's prime sponsor, said HB 325 would bar courts from awarding term or reimbursement alimony in no-fault divorces and limit courts to awarding alimony only when fault is proven. During the hearing he framed alimony in no-fault cases as a marital obligation that should not survive dissolution; he invoked the 13th Amendment in rhetorical terms while saying the bill would preserve judicial discretion in fault cases.
Mary Krueger, an attorney with New Hampshire Legal Assistance, urged the committee to declare the bill inexpedient to legislate (ITL), arguing it would harm survivors of domestic violence and low-income spouses who rely on alimony to stabilize post-divorce lives. "We oppose HB 325 and ask the committee to vote inexpedient to legislate," Krueger said, citing the role alimony plays when a spouse has sacrificed a career to raise children.
Family-law practitioners and several committee members echoed concerns that fault-based alimony would push more parties into adversarial, expensive litigation and would remove access to predictable support structures passed in recent reforms (including formulas governing duration). Representative Markel, an attorney, argued that fault grounds are difficult to prove and that the bill would restrict a judge's discretion to make restorative awards.
After public testimony and comments from committee members, Representative Markel moved that the committee find HB 325 inexpedient to legislate. The motion carried unanimously on a roll call (16-0) and the committee placed the bill on the consent calendar.
Ending: The committee's unanimous ITL vote preserves current statutory alimony authority; sponsors and some lawmakers said they would consider narrower reforms in later sessions.
Sections: lede: Sponsor framed bill as eliminating alimony in no-fault divorces; nut graf: Legal-aid, survivors and family-law practitioners said it would harm low-income spouses and domestic-violence survivors; body: committee discussion and unanimous ITL vote; ending: opportunity for future, narrower reform.
