781.708.4445

wmlevine@levinedisputeresolution.com

Divorce Mediation Blog

No Country for Old Men, Part 5: The Appeals Court Tells 79-Year Old Alimony Payor “Si, Mas” Muellner v. Muellner

Thursday, September 06, 2018

Levine Dispute Resolution - Alimony

In an unpublished opinion under Rule 1:28, the Massachusetts Appeals Court recently consigned a septuagenarian couple to resumed legal combat in the Probate and Family Court, 14 years after their divorce. The appellate court vacated two modification judgments of the Probate and Family Court, reducing the now 79-year-old husband’s alimony to his former wife, for the judge’s failure to “demonstrate ‘appropriate consideration’” of:

  • the husband’s ability to pay;
  • the wife’s financial need; and
  • the “intent” of the parties as evidenced by their divorce agreement.

Putting aside completely the M.G.L., ch. 208, §49 (f) presumption that alimony terminates upon the payor’s attainment of full social security retirement age - a distant memory for this payor - since this divorce predated the Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act (eff. 3.1.12) (See, LDRC previous blog entries, “No Country for Old Men”, Parts 1 through 4) this decision is problematic for at least two reasons:

  • it appears that the trial judge is faulted for not considering information that the parties didn’t offer him at trial; and
  • the Appeals Court’s inference of the parties’ intent is pure speculation – the kind for which it might well criticize a trial judge.

Ah, Rule 1:28 decisions. The facts are not “fully addressed”, but one fact that the Appeals Court did disclose is that both modification “trials” were decisions entrusted to the Probate and Family Court judge by agreement of the parties, to be rendered on “stipulation[s] of facts in lieu of testimony”. No one gave direct testimony, and no one was cross-examined, no experts opined.

In other words, no trial at all, with all of its glorious inefficiencies and protections.

Then again, this is what the parties signed up for. Competent adults are, or should be, allowed to make decisions, including ones that disadvantage them. These parties were not juveniles – far from it – and they chose the rules by which they would play. No parens patriae, here. Essentially, they put the judge in the position of an arbitrator, limiting the evidence and circumscribing procedure; and accepting that the decision in generally binding.

The specters of 80-year-olds paying alimony, golden years spent in litigation and my self-indulgent blog title totally aside: shouldn’t the Appeals Court have left well enough alone?

 



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



Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles


recent posts


tags

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