In another trip to the Court of Appeals for Mr. and Mrs. Kaufman, ___ Va. App. ___, ___ S.E. 2d ___, 6 VLW 349 it was held that a lump-sum award in addition to periodic spousal maintenance was no good in a case where the wife also got everything else. No special justification was shown.
A lump sum was considered all right in Poliquin v. Poliquin, 406 Va. App. 401, ___ S.E. 2d ___, 6 VLW 71, because of the number of special factors that the judge considered and listed as having been considered, but it was stressed that the judge had to also give a one-dollar reservation for future periodic alimony.
Another trip to the Court of Appeals for Mr. and Mrs. Westerberg (see 9 Va. App. 248, 386 S.E. 2d 115) resulted in a holding that the judge on remand was not authorized to make a lump-sum award of spousal support based only on evidence of the value of separate property that the other spouse held. ___ Va. App. ___, 405 S.E. 2d 638 (1991).