Divorce Mediation Blog

Just What is a “New Legal Consequence”?

Wednesday, June 07, 2017

Not a Shifting Alimony Presumption, under Van Ardsdale v. Van Ardsdale

Levine Dispute Resolution - Alimony

The crux of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s (SJC) recent Van Ardsdale v. Van Ardsdale, is that the retroactive effect of durational limits under the Alimony Reform Act (eff. 3.1.12) (ARA) is constitutional because the imposition of these constraints is “merely” presumptive and, therefore, do not “attach new legal consequences to events completed before its enactment”.

We do not question precedent. While its comparison of a sex offender’s right to contest registration requirement for adjudications that occurred before the registry legislation, in Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. 3839 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., to alimony recipients’ right to seek deviation from the “presumed” durational limits is cringe-worthy, we get the analysis. Because the sex offender and the alimony payee both have some chance of eluding the impact of new legislation, the former by an appeal to the Board, and the latter by an “interests of justice” court deviation from alimony termination, the individual’s jeopardy is not foregone; therefore, it does not rise to the level of a “new legal consequence”.

Presumptions, the SJC reasons, are “simply rules of evidence”.

But, sometimes good legal analysis defies reality, or at least practicality.

Before ARA, the burden of proving changed circumstances to justify the termination of alimony sat squarely on the shoulders of the payor. Retirement? Just one circumstance to consider. Income loss? Well, maybe, but just how did that happen, anyway. Cohabitation of the recipient? Forgettaboutit.

Now, the burden falls just as squarely the recipient, as the secondary holding Van Ardsdale, and the same day’s Popp v. Popp, demonstrate. It is a small sample to be sure, but the appellate scoreboard on reported cases for alimony payees seeking to extend alimony beyond “presumed” time limits is 0-2. In many cases, the answer will be the same for recipients as it used to be for obligors whose alimony check supported the household of not only the ex- spouse, but a new “friend” as well.

We are not at all criticizing that this burden shift has occurred. That is a policy question, and one properly reserved to the legislature. The old alimony system was, in many respects, out of control.

But, calling a major burden shift as a mere rule of evidence trivializes a very real and substantive change in our statutory law. And, it denies the everyday experience of litigants and their counsel, many of whom will not sue for alimony extensions, because presumptions are meant to be hard to overcome. And, expensive. And, risky.

Get e-mail notifications of new blog posts! Enter email address below.:

Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles

recent posts


Child Support Guidelines Twinkies divorce process divorce arbitrators divorce mediator Baseball med-arb litigation family law arbitrator divorce litigation divorce mediation family mediation special master DOMA health insurance Massachusetts divorce mediators high-risk methodology divorce arbitrator divorced mediators health coverage mediation COLA Baseball Players The Seven Sins of Alimony family support med/arb MLB labor agreement fraud Cohabitation Levine Dispute Resolution family law mediation mediations mediator Boston Baseball Arbitration Obamacare Chouteau Levine SJC divorce judgment divorce and family law Massachusetts lawyers arbitrators separation rehabilitative alimony IRC §2704 divorce mediators alimony facilitated negotiations divorce agreement Major League Baseball Arbitration divorce and family law mediators alimony law traditional negotiations Massachusetts Self-adjusting alimony orders lawyer-attended mediation family and probate law disputes annulment Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly resolve disputes dispute resolution family law General term alimony Act Reforming Alimony in the Commonwealth arbitration self-adjusting alimony medical benefits Defense of Marriage Act conciliation LDRC alimony orders Divorce alimony statute Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act child support family law arbitrators private dispute resolution lawyer Matrimonial Arbitration Family Law Arbitration divorce arbitration lawyers pre-ARA alimony support orders Uniform Arbitration Act how baseball arbitration works disputes Levine Dispute Resolutions Levine Dispute Resolution Center LLC divorce mediations Same Sex Marriage Divorce Agreements arbitrator Alimony Reform Act Massachusetts alimony and child support Levine Dispute Resolution Center Massachusetts alimony alimony reform legislation divorce lawyers