In re Marriage of Culm

Petitioner appealed from a trial court denial of his amended petition to terminate maintenance payments to his former spouse. Petitioner argued on appeal that maintenance should terminate because his former wife was in a relationship that constituted a de facto marriage. The appellate court affirmed, finding that under the Herrin factors that respondent’s relationship, while intimate and relatively long-term, was not consistent or monogamous and was, at most, an intimate dating relationship and not a de facto marriage. (HOWSE and ELLIS, concurring)