781.708.4445

wmlevine@levinedisputeresolution.com

Divorce Mediation Blog

The SJC Weighs in on Self-Adjusting Alimony Orders and Recipient “Need”: Young v. Young, Part 8

Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Levine Dispute Resolution - Alimony

“Did stated intent of the
order trump the its effect?”

In Young v. Young, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) vacated the trial court judgment that awarded variable alimony based on a fixed percentage of the husband’s gross pre-tax compensation, based in part on its conclusion that it crossed the Alimony Reform Act (ARA) (eff. 3.1.12):

…[B]ecause [the order] was intended to award the wife an amount of alimony that exceeds her need to maintain the lifestyle she enjoyed during the marriage. (Italics ours)

By focusing on the intent of the order, we can only infer that the court was addressing the judge’s rationale for the order, instead of the order itself. That election matters, because it raises two questions:

  1. If the trial judge explained herself differently, might the SJC have upheld the judgment?
  2. If the SJC looked at the order in its full ramification, would it have impacted the outcome?

The actual support award in Young was bi-lateral, rising and dropping with the husband’s income, a fact eclipsed by the court’s sharp focus on intent. Thus, while the trial judge may have focused her analysis of the parties’ rising station, her order actually provided downside protection for the husband, too.

Had the judge expressed an intent to protect the husband in the event of income decline and stressed it concomitantly with the potential for “upside”, might the “intent” infirmity that the SJC seized upon been neutralized? Or, if the judge had found that a family with roller coaster income might experience corresponding lifestyle flux?

After all, as the SJC observed:

    There may also be special circumstances where an alimony award based on a percentage of the supporting spouse's income might not be an abuse of discretion, such as where the supporting spouse's income is highly variable from year to year, sometimes severely limiting his or her ability to pay, and where a percentage formula, averaged over time, is likely not to exceed the needs of the recipient spouse.

The SJC dealt with the former, but not the latter.



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



Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles


recent posts


tags

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