Question: My ex-husband and I divorced seven years ago. At that time, he worked for a large company where he earned $75,000 per year, and I was a teacher earning $38,000. Our agreement says that he was to get 60% of the property and I got 40% -- including his retirement. He also agreed to pay me alimony of $1,000 per month. He has since remarried; I have not. I am 62 and still working; he is 59 and just retired. He says he was forced out, but I think he just quit. Now he wants to cut off my alimony. Can he do this?

Answer: Assuming the courts in your state of residence will modify spousal support set by agreement and assuming your agreement makes adequate provisions about modification and retirement, spousal support can be modified or terminated.

That said, it is clear from what you tell us that at the time of his retirement, your former husband’s income was decreased substantially due, in part, to you receiving 40% of his retirement. At the same time, depending on the terms of his retirement plan, you may be able to begin taking withdrawals that will increase your income.

While some retirements before age 62 or 65 may be voluntary, it is difficult to understand, in today’s economy, why a highly paid individual of your ex-husband’s age would stop working on his own volition in order to terminate alimony payments. That simply makes no sense. Today, more and more employers are “encouraging” older employees to step aside with a strong severance package or face termination without the added financial incentive.

While voluntary changes of condition are generally not used as bases to modify or terminate support payments, we do not believe that this rule applies to retirement because, in the final analysis, barring some catastrophe, all retirements are voluntary because just about all employees will retire some day. If your logic is taken to its illogical conclusion, your former husband would be required to work until he as physically or mentally incapable of employment to avoid the "voluntary" label.

Since even beasts of burden are put out to pasture some day, we believe that it would behoove you to seek competent advice from a matrimonial lawyer before you spend both of your retirements on lawyers.

Question: When my husband and I divorced nearly ten years ago, we agreed to keep one piece of land in our joint names because, if we had sold it, we would have taken a loss and we could not divide it equally. The court order says that we would equally be responsible for the cost of maintaining the property, paying taxes, etc. He now wants to sell his half to me or sell it all. I don’t want to buy and don’t want to sell. Do you know of any way I can stop him?

Answer: The fact that you and your husband agreed to hold the property jointly does not mean it can’t be sold. Therefore, if you and he can’t divide it “in kind” – that is, split into equal shares by survey, then you have three options: 1) One buys out the other for fair market value, 2) The property is put on the market, or 3) One of you brings a partition action to get a court-ordered sale.

If you don’t want to buy him out, we suggest that you sell it as, if you and he get into a partition action, each of your shares will be reduced by 20-30% in attorney’s fees and costs.