## Facts

- The parties married in 2006, had one minor child, and separated in June 2016.
- Wife filed claims including custody, support, equitable distribution, and alimony; Husband counterclaimed for custody, support, and equitable distribution.
- The trial court later entered an alimony order requiring Husband to pay Wife $1,100 per month for 48 months.
- Wife alleged marital misconduct by Husband, including repeated pornography use, pursuit of online sexual encounters, and extramarital affairs earlier in the marriage.
- The trial court found Husband’s sexual misconduct and related indignities continued, including deception about whether he had stopped his online behavior.
- Husband appealed only the alimony order, arguing error in the dependent-spouse determination, the finding of the accustomed standard of living, the use of financial affidavits, and the marital-fault findings, including rejection of his condonation defense.
- The record on appeal omitted a complete trial transcript, including financial testimony relevant to Husband’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenges.

## Issues

1. Whether the alimony order could be reversed for lack of competent evidence supporting findings on dependency, ability to pay, and accustomed standard of living when the appellant failed to provide a complete transcript.
2. Whether the trial court erred by taking judicial notice of financial affidavits and relying on them in setting alimony.
3. Whether the trial court erred in finding marital misconduct (illicit sexual behavior and indignities) and in rejecting Husband’s condonation defense.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the alimony order in full.
- As to dependency, standard of living, and other financial findings, the court held the incomplete record prevented meaningful review; it presumed the findings were supported by competent evidence.
- As to marital misconduct, the court held the findings were supported and the trial court did not err in considering Husband’s pornography use, online sexual conduct, and affairs.
- The court held condonation did not bar consideration of misconduct where evidence supported that the misconduct continued or resumed after any forgiveness.

## Legal Principles

- Alimony determinations are reviewed for abuse of discretion; a ruling is reversible only if manifestly unsupported by reason or arbitrary.
- In a bench-tried domestic case, appellate review asks whether competent evidence supports findings of fact and whether conclusions of law follow from those facts.
- The appellant bears the burden to provide a record sufficient for review; when the record is incomplete, doubts are resolved in favor of the judgment, and issues requiring missing evidence are affirmed.
- Marital misconduct is a statutory factor in determining alimony under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-16.3A.
- Condonation is conditional; resumed or continuing misconduct can defeat a condonation defense and permit consideration of later misconduct for alimony purposes.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed a time-limited alimony award because the appellant failed to supply a complete transcript to support evidentiary challenges, and because the trial court’s marital-misconduct findings—together with evidence of continued misconduct—supported rejecting condonation and sustaining the alimony determination.


Gilmartin v. Gilmartin, 822 S.E.2d 771 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018)