781.708.4445

wmlevine@levinedisputeresolution.com

Divorce Mediation Blog

Massachusetts Alimony: Watching the Pot - Part 2 A Mediator’s Perspective

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

In the last entry we reflected on divorce lawyers’ impatient wait for “clarification” of the complex Massachusetts alimony “reform” statute from the Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court. They hope that with appellate “guidance”, they may be better able to prepare their clients for what may happen in court in what are otherwise unclear scenarios. Ambiguity causes anxiety in lawyers and their clients alike. Given the number of cases in the appellate “pipeline” a year out, 2013 is the year when interpretive case law will begin to trickle, or perhaps, flood out of the appellate courts in downtown Boston. This flow may be edifying or confusing, consistent or scattered, but to lawyers, it is essential.

In the meantime, for facilitative divorce mediators, appellate silence is a form of opportunity. Clients frequently turn to mediators and ask: what would happen in court? Three possible answers are:

  1. I know, but I’d rather that the two of you try to figure this out for yourselves.
  2. I don’t know because the case law is confusing and inconsistent.
  3. The statute leaves it up to you to decide what makes sense for you and your family.

The first answer, while true to principles of facilitative mediation, is often frustrating for clients. It can also pose a struggle for the mediator who is trying to foster discussion rather than shut it down, especially in a way that might suggest potential bias; yet the knowledge of appellate interpretation may be important to the parties’ understanding. The second answer is negative, may discourage the spouses and undermine confidence in the knowledge of the mediator.

Answer number 3 is positive and puts the focus back on the parties themselves. Where the legislature left discretion, the parties are left to exercise it by consensus, untrammeled by the imperfect analogies of different appellate panels in other peoples’ scenarios where too few facts are known. Instead of shutting down discussion and limiting options, the clients are free to explore and agree; and so long as they find the “range of reason”, a judge should approve their work.

Take an example. The parties have a long-term marriage but an alimony payor who is close to the federally defined retirement age. The strong language of the alimony statute suggests that alimony should terminate when that age is reached, regardless of other circumstances or equities. But, the statute then provides a “deviation” opportunity: to set a different alimony termination structure for “good cause shown”. What then is good cause?

For the moment, mediators can encourage a wide open conversation on “what is good cause to you?”, free of the knowledge that hypothetical cause a, b or c may have already been ruled “in” or “out”, by one appellate court or another. When the clients can freely list all the factors that seem relevant to them, they can then move on to evaluate them, weigh them, discard them or trade them. The result is an exchange of ideas that can result in an individually tailored suit of good cause: the parties’ own, and not someone else’s or something off the rack.

Once the appellate courts begin to speak, we as mediators will be charged with the knowledge and tasked with deciding in each case what to or not to disclose of the emerging clarity or confusion that the cases bring. From that perspective, we might say “take your time”.

The viewpoint of a family law arbitrator is quite different. We will discuss that in our next entry.




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



Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles


recent posts


tags

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