When a couple divorces, the party required to pay alimony and/or child support typically agrees to take out a specific amount of life insurance to secure his or her support obligations. Generally, the insurance policy names the former spouse or children as the beneficiaries. While a spousal support award may be modified in certain circumstances, it does not necessarily follow that the party’s life insurance obligations also will be reduced as evidenced by a recent New Jersey decision.

In Gorczyca v. Gorczyca, the husband agreed to maintain a $1.2 million life insurance policy with his wife as beneficiary for so long as he had an alimony obligation, and a $1.3 million life insurance policy with the children as beneficiaries. The husband fell behind in his support payments and eventually the parties agreed to reduce the amount of support and insurance. However, the husband failed to abide by the terms of the new agreement and again sought to reduce his support and insurance obligations. Among his contentions were that his obligation to carry life insurance should be reduced to $350,000 of coverage, because “given his expected retirement it was sufficient to satisfy his then outstanding alimony and arrears obligations” to his ex-wife.

The trial court denied the husband’s request to reduce his life insurance finding that it “was unable to calculate [the husband’s] potential total alimony obligations to [the wife] because there was no support for [the husband’s] argument that his alimony obligation would cease on his retirement. In addition, the court concluded that [the husband] was unlikely to be able to obtain a new life insurance policy for $350,000 were he to cancel his current policy, given concerns regarding his insurability.” The husband then sought to introduce a letter from his insurance carrier that allegedly indicated he could get insurance. The trial and Appellate Court agreed that the insurance carrier’s letter did not guarantee that a reduction in his life insurance coverage would be granted. Since the husband had agreed to maintain $2 million in life insurance, he was obligated to maintain the life insurance.

The case of Gorczyca v. Gorczyca demonstrates the pitfalls of not sufficiently correlating life insurance to alimony and child support obligations. Before you agree to maintain any level of life insurance, contact us for an experienced attorney in these matters.


The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.

Privacy Policy

This privacy policy applies to information collected online from users of this website. In this policy, you can learn what kind of information we collect, when and how we might use that information, how we protect the information, and the choices you have with respect to your personal information.

What personal information is collected through this website and how is it used?

We collect information about our users in three ways: directly from the user, from our Web server logs and through cookies. We use the information primarily to provide you with a personalized Internet experience that delivers the information, resources, and services that are most relevant and helpful to you. We don’t share any of the information you provide with others, unless we say so in this Privacy Policy, or when we believe in good faith that the law requires it.


If you have any additional questions or concerns about this privacy policy, please contact us via the phone number, contact form or mailing address listed on this website. If our information practices change in a significant way, we will post the policy changes here.

Effective September 14, 2015