Konzelman v. Konzelman,
729 A.2d 7 (N.J. 1999).


Procedure: Plaintiff former wife sought review of a judgment from the Superior Court, Appellate Division (New Jersey), which held that plaintiff and defendant former husband's settlement agreement providing for termination of alimony upon plaintiff's cohabitation with an unrelated male was enforceable.

Facts: Kathleen Konzelman's (P's) and Lawrence Konzelman's (D's) separation agreement authorized termination of D's alimony payments in the event of P's cohabitation with an unrelated male. The judgment of divorce incorporated the separation agreement. D stopped payments after evidence of P's cohabitation with an unrelated male. P filed a motion for D to resume payments and for arrearages. D filed a cross-motion for termination of alimony payments. The trial court found cohabitation but did not terminate alimony. It determined P received $170 in income that was attributable to the cohabitation and reduced the alimony payments accordingly. The court of appeals reversed and termi-nated alimony. P appeals.

Issue: May a properly settlement agreement provide for termination of alimony if a spouse cohabitates with another for a period longer than four months?

Rule: A property settlement agreement that provides for termination of alimony if a spouse cohabitates with another for a period longer than four months is enforceable

Holding: Yes. Separation agreements are favored by courts, if they are fair and just, as peaceful means of terminating marital strife and discord if they are no against public policy. The adoption of a separation agreement into a divorce judgment does; render the agreement immutable. The court has continuing power to mo; them on a showing of changed circumstances.

Analysis: The court affirmed an appellant judgment that held that plaintiff and defendant's settlement agreement providing for termination of alimony upon plaintiff's cohabitation with an unrelated male was enforceable. The settlement agreement was incorporated in the parties' final divorce decree. Defendant had stopped alimony payments after private detectives hired by defendant reported that plaintiff was living with another man for four continuous months. The court concluded that based on minimum standards to assure their mutuality, voluntariness, and fairness, cohabitation agreements could be enforced. In particular, agreements to terminate alimony on the condition of cohabitation must be voluntary and consensual, based on assurances that these undertakings were fully informed, knowingly assumed, and fair and equitable. Further, fairness required that each party be adequately represented by independent counsel and that both parties completely understand the nature of the agreement. Fairness also required judicial review and approval. Finally, an agreement must be predicated on a relationship of cohabitation that can be shown to have stability, permanency, and mutual interdependence.