In the 2025 decision In re Marriage of Adeyeye and Faramaye (112 Cal.App.5th 119), the California Court of Appeal addressed, for the first time, how to calculate spousal support when it is based on a Form I-864 Affidavit of Support. This case provides critical guidance for U.S. citizens who sponsor immigrant spouses and later face divorce proceedings, especially those unaware that their immigration-based financial commitments may outlive the marriage.

The Background

Sunday Adeyeye, a U.S. citizen, married Adebukola Faramaye, a Nigerian national. To facilitate her immigration, Adeyeye signed a Form I-864, pledging to maintain her income at no less than 125% of the federal poverty guidelines. After their relationship ended, Adeyeye filed for divorce. Faramaye, still a conditional permanent resident, responded by filing a request for spousal support based entirely on the I-864, claiming she was entitled to $1,569 per month.

Critically, Faramaye earned $57,900 in the previous year—well over 125% of the poverty guideline—yet the trial court granted her request in full and declined to consider her income in determining Adeyeye's support obligation. The trial court believed that only achieving 40 qualifying quarters of Social Security credit (approximately 10 years of work) could terminate the I-864 obligation.

Adeyeye appealed.

The Court of Appeal's Ruling

The appellate court reversed the trial court's order and clarified a key legal issue: how to calculate the financial support owed under an I-864 affidavit when the sponsored immigrant earns income.

The Court held that a sponsor's obligation under the I-864 is not automatically a full monthly payment equal to 125% of the federal poverty level. Rather, the obligation is to ensure the immigrant's income reaches that threshold. Therefore, if the sponsored immigrant already earns more than 125% of the poverty guideline, the sponsor owes nothing.

The Court cited similar holdings from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and other jurisdictions, including federal courts, where the consensus is that the sponsor only needs to cover the difference between the immigrant's actual income and the federal poverty threshold—not the entire amount.

The Court emphasized that the five conditions listed in the I-864 (such as U.S. citizenship or 40 quarters of work) determine when the obligation ends, but do not mandate full support payments regardless of the immigrant's earnings. In other words, income is not irrelevant just because the obligation remains in force.

The Court remanded the matter to the trial court to determine whether Faramaye's income met or exceeded the threshold, and if not, how much Adeyeye actually owed, if anything.

Why This Case Matters

This ruling is especially significant for California residents navigating divorce involving an immigrant spouse. The I-864 is a binding federal contract, but it is enforceable in state court, and California judges must now interpret it in line with the appellate court's holding in this case.

Key takeaways for California sponsors:

• Obligation Survives Divorce: The sponsor's duty under the I-864 continues even after marital dissolution—unless one of the five termination conditions applies.

• Support is Conditional, Not Automatic: A sponsor doesn't automatically owe a fixed amount. If the immigrant earns enough income, the sponsor's obligation is reduced or eliminated.

• Actual Income Matters: Courts must consider the sponsored immigrant's real income when calculating support, rather than blindly awarding 125% of the poverty level.

For immigrants relying on an I-864 for support, the ruling may limit recoverable support if they are gainfully employed. While the affidavit offers protection against destitution, it does not serve as a guaranteed income stream where none is needed.

What This Means for Your Case

If you're a sponsor or immigrant spouse in a divorce or support dispute, In re Marriage of Adeyeye and Faramaye should guide your expectations and strategy.

For sponsors: if the immigrant spouse is working and earns above the poverty threshold, you can—and should—argue that your financial obligation under the I-864 is minimal or even zero. Documentation of the immigrant's earnings will be critical.

For immigrant spouses: understand that courts will now examine your income carefully. If you are below the threshold, you remain entitled to supplemental support—but not more than necessary to meet the 125% minimum.

Consult with Legal Counsel

Because the I-864 is a federal document interpreted in state courts, the nuances can be confusing, and mistakes can lead to unjust outcomes. At the Law Office of Steve Lopez, we help both sponsors and immigrant spouses understand their rights and obligations under the I-864 and how those play out in family court.

Whether you're enforcing the affidavit or defending against an unjust support demand, a careful legal analysis is essential. This case shows that California courts will now look at the full financial picture—just as they should.