On April 5 the North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the trial court in Brady v Brady after finding an award representing 80% of Husband's net income was not reasonable.

In "reading between the lines" of this opinion, the Husband apparently had some very bad facts!

The analysis was very straightforward and clear. In spite of the trial court's attempt to comply with the statutory requirements regarding the amount and duration of the award, it was silent on the most critical fact- whether or not the Husband had the ability to pay the ordered amount.

The trial court found Husband's net income to be just over $10,992 per month and rejected Husband's stated expenses of $11,974, but made no finding regarding what it believed to be Husband's reasonable needs.  The trial court then found Wife's net need to be $5,250, which was awarded to Wife as alimony, and then ordered $3,483 in child support. The Court of Appeals inferred that the trial court found of Husband's net need to be $5,672 ($10,992-$5,250).

The Court of Appeals stated that "Defendant’s net monthly income is approximately $10,922.01, monthly reasonable needs and expenses are $5,672.01, and monthly child support obligation is $3,483.83, Defendant’s monthly surplus is $1,766.17. Thus, the finding that he has the ability to pay $5,250.00 per month in spousal support is not supported by the findings of fact."

Apparently this simple math escaped the trial court.