Otterbein v. Otterbein
There was evidentiary support for a time-limited spousal support order and the trial judge did not err in principle, but the three-year limit over-emphasized self-sufficiency; on the facts a five-year time limit is appropriate and the costs order is upheld.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C31134
- Parties
- Appellant/petitioner: Penny Lynn Otterbein; Respondent: Thomas Wilfrid Abraham Otterbein
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 13 August 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Family / Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; judgment varied to extend the support period from three years to five years; otherwise the judgment is affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Spousal Support Duration, Self Sufficiency, Costs Allocation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Penny Lynn Otterbein
Appellant/petitioner
Thomas Wilfrid Abraham Otterbein
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Family / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a time-limited spousal support order was appropriate
- 2 Whether the three-year duration was reasonable
- 3 Whether the trial judge erred in the costs order
Ratio Decidendi
There was evidentiary support for a time-limited spousal support order and the trial judge did not err in principle, but the three-year limit over-emphasized self-sufficiency; on the facts a five-year time limit is appropriate and the costs order is upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; judgment varied to extend the support period from three years to five years; otherwise the judgment is affirmed.
Orders
- Judgment varied to provide for a period of five years instead of three years in paragraph 7.
- Otherwise the judgment stands.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Otterbein v. Otterbein Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 1999-08-13 Docket numbers C31134 Judges Charron, Louise Vivianne; Feldman, Kathryn N.; O’Connor, Dennis Subject Family Decision Content DATE: 19990813 DOCKET: C31134 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: PENNY LYNN OTTERBEIN (Petitioner/Appellant) v. THOMAS WILFRID ABRAHAM OTTERBEIN (Respondent) BEFORE: CHARRON, FELDMAN and O’CONNOR JJ.A. COUNSEL: J.W. Neeb, Q.C. For the appellant T.C. Flannery For the respondent HEARD: August 6, 1999 Appeal from the judgment of Borkovich J. dated November 16, 1998 ENDORSEMENT [1] In our view, there was evidence upon which the trial judge could base his decision to make a time-limited support order. However, we are of the view that, in setting the time limit at three years, the trial judge over-emphasized the importance of encouraging self-sufficiency. There were a number of other factors that militated against such a timely achievement of that goal. [2] In all the circumstances, we are of the view that, as suggested by counsel for the appellant as an alternative submission, a period of five years is appropriate. [3] We are not persuaded that the trial judge made any error in the exercise of his discretion with respect to the costs order. [4] The appeal is allowed, the judgment is varied to provide for a period of five years instead of three years in paragraph 7. Otherwise, the judgment stands. [5] In light of the divided success, the appellant will be awarded one half of her costs of the appeal fixed in the amount of $2,000.