2012— Dailey v. Dailey, 59 Va. App. 734The court erred when it found that the husband`s retirement and the beginning of the resulting payments to the wife on his pension were reasonably foreseeable when the parties entered into their transaction agreement, and therefore an error in the finding that retirement was not a sufficient basis for the husband`s request for a reduction in spousal assistance. The settlement agreement between the parties provided that sp assistance could be amended on the basis of a substantial change in circumstances. The parties found that the husband`s retirement was a significant change, but the court found that the amendment was reasonably foreseeable, as the parties` transaction contract specifically provided for the wife to receive a portion of the husband`s pension after retirement. However, there was compelling evidence that Husband did not intend to retire at the time of the parties` contract change. In addition, the transaction agreement was not concluded on the question of whether sped assistance would be maintained or terminated with the husband`s retirement. Thus, the Court of Appeal found that the agreement did not provide a basis for concluding that the parties had reasonably contemplated or foreseen the effects of the husband`s departure on his obligation to assist the spouse and therefore dismissed the case in determining whether the husband`s unpredictable retirement warranted a change in sp upon the spouse. 1996-Davidson v.
Davidson, Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No. 1588-95-2The general provision of the real estate transaction agreement, which provided for the ”mutual release and release” of ”all means, claims, rights or claims on all grounds of law or fairness,” did not in itself function as a waiver of the wife`s right to seek divorce on the basis of adultery. 2015 — Brandenstein v. Brandenstein, Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No. 0249-15-4The Court erred in finding that a provision of a matrimonial settlement contract was not autonomous. The agreement has defined a clear and clear formula for determining sped assistance and defines the amounts to be included in this formula by reference to the husband`s annual returns.
Thus, the provision allowed the parties to determine with certainty and without the participation of a court the amounts to be entered into the formula. 2012— Belcher v. Belcher, Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No. 2226-11-2 The court hated an error in denying the husband`s request to terminate the spouse`s assistance, and denouncing only the termination events at Va.