What findings must Utah courts make for permanent alimony awards? Rehn v. Rehn Explained

In Rehn v. Rehn, the Utah Court of Appeals clarified critical requirements for permanent alimony awards and child support calculations in joint custody arrangements, providing important guidance for family law practitioners.

Background and Facts

Charles and Mary Rehn divorced after a twenty-year marriage with two minor children aged nine and six. The trial court awarded joint legal and physical custody but used a sole custody worksheet to calculate $1,045 monthly child support. The court also awarded Mary permanent alimony of $1,200 monthly, allocated 80% of the parties’ $19,000 tax debt to Charles, and ordered him to pay $6,880 in attorney fees. Additionally, the court excluded Charles’s vocational expert witness for untimely disclosure.

Key Legal Issues

The case presented several critical issues: whether trial courts must explicitly find “extenuating circumstances” to award permanent alimony beyond the marriage duration under Utah Code Ann. § 30-3-5(7)(h); whether courts must use joint custody child support worksheets when overnight visitation exceeds 25% of the year; and whether excluding expert witnesses requires clear judicial deadlines for witness disclosure.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court of appeals held that trial courts must explicitly find “extenuating circumstances” to award alimony beyond the marriage duration—general statements about appropriateness are insufficient. The court interpreted the statutory language to require specific findings using that exact terminology. Regarding child support, the court held that when parties have joint physical custody with overnight visits exceeding 25% of the year, courts must either use the joint custody worksheet or make detailed findings under Utah Code Ann. § 78-45-7(3) justifying deviation from the guidelines.

Practice Implications

This decision emphasizes the importance of precise statutory compliance in family law proceedings. Practitioners seeking permanent alimony must ensure trial courts make explicit findings of extenuating circumstances rather than relying on general statements. For child support in joint custody arrangements, careful attention must be paid to the applicable worksheet requirements and supporting findings. The case also reinforces that witness disclosure deadlines must be clear and specific to justify exclusion sanctions.