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? Forget about it.

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


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