Missouri Supreme Court to Man: “There’s a Reason Why They’re Called Fixed Divorce Agreements!”
Despite one man’s allegations and arguments, the Missouri Supreme Court has ruled that fixed divorce agreements can’t be changed. Joseph Richardson claimed that his ex-wife Ida had tried to hire a hit man to kill him and thus argued that he should not have to keep paying her more than $2,400 a month. Ida Richardson has not been charged with trying to kill her ex-husband.
Joseph Richardson and his attorney Chet Pleban, had argued before the state Supreme Court in December that there are certain exceptions which allow a fixed separation agreement to be changed. Specifically, Pleban argued that people should not be allowed to profit from bad acts and added that it’s wrong to not let a judge reconsider a fixed divorce agreement when warranted by outstanding circumstances. Joseph Richardson had agreed to pay his ex-wife $2,425 a month until she remarries or one of them dies.
The Missouri Supreme Court was not buying Richardson and Pleban’s argument, saying that if Joseph died, his wife’s monthly payments would stop. In addition to shooting down the argument that Ida Richardson’s alleged actions were solely motivated by profit, the Court said this case is separate from possible claims regarding insurance policies or other funds payable upon death.
The Missouri Supreme Court also clarified a law stating that a court can make changes to a fixed divorce agreement upon finding it “unconscionable.” The state Supreme Court said that this provision only applies before the agreement becomes final. Judges had also wondered whether making exceptions to fixed divorce agreements would open up a flood of litigation from people trying to get out of making alimony payments. Ida Richardson’s divorce lawyer said that Joseph had tried to change the couple’s separation agreement several times.
