An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA05-1261

Filed: 2 May 2006


v .                         Nash County
                            No. 02 CVD 1572

    Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 11 May 2005 by Judge William C. Farris in Nash County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 19 April 2006.

    Perry Anthony & Sosna, by Cedric R. Perry, for plaintiff- appellant.

    Craft Levin & Abney, L.L.P., by Wesley Abney, for defendant- appellant.

    TYSON, Judge.

    Georgia D. Russell (“plaintiff”) appeals from an order entered awarding her alimony for a period of twelve months. We affirm.

I. Background
    Plaintiff and Larry Russell (“defendant”) were married on or about 21 September 1971. The parties separated in January of 2002 and were divorced on 10 April 2003. The issues of alimony and distribution were heard and the district court entered an equitable distribution order and awarded plaintiff alimony in the amount of $400.00 per month for a period of twelve months. Plaintiff appeals.
II. Issue
    Plaintiff argues the trial court erred in awarding alimony for only twelve months to plaintiff.
III. Standard of Review
        “Decisions regarding the amount of alimony are left to the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be disturbed on appeal unless there has been a manifest abuse of that discretion.” Bookholt v. Bookholt, 136 N.C. App. 247, 249-50, 523 S.E.2d 729, 731 (1999) (citing Quick v. Quick, 305 N.C. 446, 453, 290 S.E.2d 653, 658 (1982)). Our Supreme Court has cautioned this Court to apply our review “strictly” and has explained, “[A] manifest abuse of discretion must be made to appear from the record as a whole with the party alleging the existence of an abuse bearing the heavy burden of proof.” Worthington v. Bynum and Cogdell v. Bynum, 305 N.C. 478, 484-85, 290 S.E.2d 599, 604 (1982).

Kelly v. Kelly, 167 N.C. App. 437, 441, 606 S.E.2d 364, 368 (2004).
An abuse of discretion occurs when the ruling is “manifestly unsupported by reason” or is “so arbitrary that it could not have been the result of a reasoned decision.” Briley v. Farabow, 348 N.C. 537, 547, 501 S.E.2d 649, 656 (1998).
IV. Alimony Award
    Plaintiff's sole argument on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering alimony for only twelve months to plaintiff. We disagree.
    Alimony awards are governed by section 50-16.3A of our General Statutes. This section provides:
        The court shall award alimony to the dependent spouse upon a finding that one spouse is a dependent spouse, that the other spouse is a supporting spouse, and that an award of alimony is equitable after considering all relevant factors, including those set out in subsection (b) of this section.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-16.3A(a) (2005). The duration of the alimony award may be for a specified or an indefinite term. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-16.3A(b). The statute sets forth sixteen enumerated factors the court shall consider to award alimony. Id. The statute further provides, “The court shall make a specific finding of fact on each of the factors in subsection (b) of this section if evidence is offered on that factor.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50- 16.3A(c).
    Here, the trial court found:
        15. Plaintiff is the dependent spouse, and defendant is the supporting spouse. The court also finds, however that the monthly expenses alleged by plaintiff are exaggerated. After consideration of all the statutory factors set forth in G.S. 50-16.3A(b), the Court finds that an award to plaintiff of $400.00 per month, for a period of twelve months, is an equitable award of alimony in this case. The said alimony payments shall begin on the first of the month following entry of judgment in this case.

Plaintiff argues the trial court failed to find how her expenses were “exaggerated” or which expenses were “exaggerated.” Plaintiff does not dispute the amount of the alimony award, only its duration. She concedes that her monthly expenses are no more than her own income plus the $400.00 monthly alimony awarded. The trial court's finding that plaintiff's alleged monthly expenses were “exaggerated” under our standard of review does not require greater specificity on which of plaintiff's expenses were “exaggerated” after the trial court considered “all of the relevant factors.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-16.3A(a).    Plaintiff also argues the trial court failed to make findings of fact on matters in evidence such as the duration of the marriage and marital misconduct of defendant. Plaintiff has failed to show or argue which evidence was presented she contends the trial court failed to make findings upon. N.C. Rule App. 9(a)(1)(e) (2005) (“The record on appeal in civil actions and special proceedings shall contain . . . so much of the evidence . . . as is necessary for an understanding of all errors assigned.). This assignment of error is dismissed.
V. Conclusion
    Plaintiff has failed to show the trial court abused its discretion in awarding her alimony of $400.00 per month for twelve month's duration. The trial court's order is affirmed.
    Judges GEER and JACKSON concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***