## Facts

- Rodney D. Lucas (husband) and Brenda K. Lucas (wife) divorced on March 27, 1997.
- The divorce order required the husband to pay the wife $850 per month in spousal support.
- At the time of divorce, the husband’s annual income was about $128,320.
- The husband later sought to end spousal support, alleging (1) the wife was living with David Davis in a de facto marriage and (2) the parties’ incomes had changed.
- The husband alleged the de facto marriage began around October 1999; he filed his petition to terminate support in family court in 2000.
- By 1999, the husband’s income had decreased to about $116,779, while the wife earned about $31,000.
- At a hearing before a family law master, the wife testified that she and Davis had lived together for more than two years, shared household chores, and maintained a conjugal relationship.
- The wife testified she treated Davis’s home as her permanent residence and used it as her mailing address.
- Evidence showed the wife and Davis jointly owned several vehicles.
- The wife testified she paid Davis $300 per month toward shared household expenses.
- The family law master found a de facto marriage existed under W. Va. Code § 48-5-707 and concluded the relationship gave the wife financial advantages (including relief from rent and most utilities and reduced food and other shared costs).
- Even with that finding, the master recommended reducing spousal support from $850 to $700 per month (about a 17.5% reduction), rather than ending it.
- The family court adopted the master’s findings and reduced support to $700; the Circuit Court of Kanawha County affirmed.
- The husband appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

## Issues

1. What standard of review applies when the Supreme Court of Appeals reviews a circuit court order that adopted findings made in family court in a spousal support dispute?
2. After finding the recipient spouse is in a de facto marriage under W. Va. Code § 48-5-707, did the lower courts err by reducing support to $700 per month without a legally sufficient reassessment of whether support should be reduced further or terminated?

## Decision

- The court applied a three-part standard of review: (1) abuse of discretion for the ultimate spousal support ruling, (2) clearly erroneous review for factual findings, and (3) de novo review for legal questions and statutory interpretation.
- The court affirmed the lower tribunals’ determination that the wife’s relationship with Davis constituted a de facto marriage under W. Va. Code § 48-5-707.
- The court held that when a payor seeks reduction or termination of spousal support based on the recipient’s de facto marriage, the payor bears the burden of proving the de facto marriage by a preponderance of the evidence; the husband met that burden on this record.
- The court agreed that a de facto marriage can justify modification of spousal support, but it found the lower tribunals’ analysis of the proper amount of modification was incomplete.
- The court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings so the lower court could reassess spousal support in a manner consistent with the statute and the evidence regarding the financial consequences of the de facto marriage.

## Legal Principles

- When a circuit court has adopted family court findings, appellate review is three-pronged: abuse of discretion for the final support order, clear error for underlying factual findings, and de novo review for questions of law and statutory interpretation.
- A payor seeking reduction or termination of spousal support based on the recipient’s de facto marriage has the burden to prove the de facto marriage by a preponderance of the evidence.
- In determining whether a de facto marriage exists under W. Va. Code § 48-5-707(a)(2), courts should use the statutory factors as a guide and may also consider other evidence relevant to whether the relationship is marriage-like.
- Proof of a de facto marriage does not mechanically require termination of support; it permits modification, which may include reduction or termination depending on the relationship’s financial effect and other applicable support considerations.
- A support modification must be supported by findings that connect the statutory framework and the evidence (including the economic benefits flowing from the de facto marriage) to the amount ordered.

## Conclusion

Lucas v. Lucas held that the husband proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his ex-wife was in a de facto marriage under W. Va. Code § 48-5-707, supporting modification of spousal support; however, because the lower tribunals did not adequately explain or apply the governing framework to determine whether support should be reduced more or terminated, the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a proper reassessment.


Lucas v. Lucas, 592 S.E.2d 646 (2003)