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

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