Change May Be Coming for Massachusetts' Alimony Laws
May 4, 2010 By RA Jaworski P.C
Alimony laws have become a hot-button issue in Massachusetts, particularly in light of a recent decision issued by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In Pierce v. Pierce, the court rejected the argument that alimony payments should stop when someone reaches retirement age.
Alimony laws have become a hot-button issue in Massachusetts, particularly in light of a recent decision issued by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In Pierce v. Pierce, the court rejected the argument that alimony payments should stop when someone reaches retirement age.
As the court reasoned, although alimony can be lowered or in some cases cut off upon voluntary retirement, reaching retirement age is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant a change in alimony payments. Retirement is just one factor that may be considered when deciding whether to modify alimony and that decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.
In Pierce, prominent retired judge and attorney Rudolph F. Pierce requested that his alimony payments to his former wife in the amount of $110,000 per year be cut-off after he voluntarily retired in 2008 from his legal practice. The judge denied his request and instead lowered his annual obligation to $42,000. Pierce appealed the judge's opinion, arguing that it was tantamount to refusing him the right to retire and ordering him to continue working to support his former spouse.
The appellate court, however, did not agree with Pierce's argument. On appeal, the court found that even after retirement Pierce still had the ability to pay alimony to his ex-wife, and she had a demonstrated need for the payments, as she had lost her job and was still a year away from qualifying for federal social security benefits. Pierce's ability to pay was based not only on his own assets and income, but also on the income of his new wife, who, the court noted, was covering the majority of their household expenses.
Massachusetts Alimony Laws
Massachusetts is one of a handful of states that generally grants alimony for life. It also is in the minority of states that uses the assets and income of a new spouse for the purpose of determining what a supporting spouse can afford to pay in alimony. Many argue that these two laws together have produced many unfair results.
For example, one spouse testified before state legislators that she has had to take a second job to help her husband pay alimony to his first wife. In another example, an ex-wife who agreed at the time of her divorce, more than 20 years ago, to waive any right to past, present or future alimony, recently received a judgment from a Massachusetts court for $400 per week in alimony payments from her former husband, who is now 68 years old.
In Massachusetts, state law requires the court to consider a set group of criteria before awarding alimony or modifying the terms of a previous alimony agreement. These factors include the age, health, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity for each party to acquire more income and assets in the future (G.L. c. 208§34). Notably missing from the statute is any reference to the duration of payments.
State alimony laws were passed in an era when men were the principal breadwinners and the majority of women stayed at home to take care of the house and family. During this time, alimony payments were meant to help spouses who had no real means to support themselves or who earned significantly less than their former husbands.
Now, however, with women making up half of the workforce, there is a legitimate question of whether it is time to reform state alimony laws to take into account these new dynamics. Alimony is being viewed much more as a temporary support payment to give spouses time to get back on their feet and reenter the workforce rather than a life-long support system. This change is attitude towards alimony has led to a push not only in the Massachusetts legislature, but in at least eight other states to reform their alimony laws.
Pending State Legislation
Two separate bills have been introduced in the state legislature, one in the House and one in the Senate. The house bill, H.B. 1785, is the more far-reaching of the two and seeks to substantially change the factors the court must consider before awarding alimony. Some of the new factors would include:
-All alimony payments cease once the spouses reach retirement age
-Alimony payments are not to exceed a total of 12 years, unless the recipient spouse is caring for a child under 16 years old
-Alimony payments that last for longer than five years will be decreased by 10% each year after the fifth year, unless the recipient spouse is caring for a child under 16 or is unable to find gainful employment
-The only ground to seek an increase in alimony is if the Consumer Product Index rose during the previous year. In those cases, the increase is limited to the percentage of the CPI increase
-Income and assets of a new spouse or person the supporting spouse shares a home with cannot be included in determining alimony
H.B. 1785 was introduced in January 2009 and has the support of more than 70 state lawmakers. The stated purpose of the bill is to ensure that the recipient spouse becomes self-sufficient within a reasonable amount of time and that alimony does not become a life-long obligation.
The senate bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Cynthia Stone Creem (D-Newton) and Rep. Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley), is much less ambitious and seeks only to include the words "and duration" into the list of factors courts must consider prior to granting alimony. The senate bill has been proposed as a more flexible alternative to the house bill, giving judges the discretion to determine an appropriate length of time for alimony payments without requiring them to follow a strict set of rules.
In response to the growing demand in Massachusetts for a change to its alimony laws, the state legislature has created a joint task force to consider the two bills and other options to change the state's alimony laws. Whether either bill will eventually become law or a new option will come out of the task force, however, is not likely to happen until sometime in 2010.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Rudy Jaworski
Since 1981, our firm's founder, Massachusetts family law attorney Rudolf A. Jaworski, has focused on the negotiation, mediation and trial litigation of both straightforward and complex divorce, child custody and child support disputes.
Copyright RA Jaworski P.C
More information about RA Jaworski P.C
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
As the court reasoned, although alimony can be lowered or in some cases cut off upon voluntary retirement, reaching retirement age is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant a change in alimony payments. Retirement is just one factor that may be considered when deciding whether to modify alimony and that decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.
In Pierce, prominent retired judge and attorney Rudolph F. Pierce requested that his alimony payments to his former wife in the amount of $110,000 per year be cut-off after he voluntarily retired in 2008 from his legal practice. The judge denied his request and instead lowered his annual obligation to $42,000. Pierce appealed the judge's opinion, arguing that it was tantamount to refusing him the right to retire and ordering him to continue working to support his former spouse.
The appellate court, however, did not agree with Pierce's argument. On appeal, the court found that even after retirement Pierce still had the ability to pay alimony to his ex-wife, and she had a demonstrated need for the payments, as she had lost her job and was still a year away from qualifying for federal social security benefits. Pierce's ability to pay was based not only on his own assets and income, but also on the income of his new wife, who, the court noted, was covering the majority of their household expenses.
Massachusetts Alimony Laws
Massachusetts is one of a handful of states that generally grants alimony for life. It also is in the minority of states that uses the assets and income of a new spouse for the purpose of determining what a supporting spouse can afford to pay in alimony. Many argue that these two laws together have produced many unfair results.
For example, one spouse testified before state legislators that she has had to take a second job to help her husband pay alimony to his first wife. In another example, an ex-wife who agreed at the time of her divorce, more than 20 years ago, to waive any right to past, present or future alimony, recently received a judgment from a Massachusetts court for $400 per week in alimony payments from her former husband, who is now 68 years old.
In Massachusetts, state law requires the court to consider a set group of criteria before awarding alimony or modifying the terms of a previous alimony agreement. These factors include the age, health, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity for each party to acquire more income and assets in the future (G.L. c. 208§34). Notably missing from the statute is any reference to the duration of payments.
State alimony laws were passed in an era when men were the principal breadwinners and the majority of women stayed at home to take care of the house and family. During this time, alimony payments were meant to help spouses who had no real means to support themselves or who earned significantly less than their former husbands.
Now, however, with women making up half of the workforce, there is a legitimate question of whether it is time to reform state alimony laws to take into account these new dynamics. Alimony is being viewed much more as a temporary support payment to give spouses time to get back on their feet and reenter the workforce rather than a life-long support system. This change is attitude towards alimony has led to a push not only in the Massachusetts legislature, but in at least eight other states to reform their alimony laws.
Pending State Legislation
Two separate bills have been introduced in the state legislature, one in the House and one in the Senate. The house bill, H.B. 1785, is the more far-reaching of the two and seeks to substantially change the factors the court must consider before awarding alimony. Some of the new factors would include:
-All alimony payments cease once the spouses reach retirement age
-Alimony payments are not to exceed a total of 12 years, unless the recipient spouse is caring for a child under 16 years old
-Alimony payments that last for longer than five years will be decreased by 10% each year after the fifth year, unless the recipient spouse is caring for a child under 16 or is unable to find gainful employment
-The only ground to seek an increase in alimony is if the Consumer Product Index rose during the previous year. In those cases, the increase is limited to the percentage of the CPI increase
-Income and assets of a new spouse or person the supporting spouse shares a home with cannot be included in determining alimony
H.B. 1785 was introduced in January 2009 and has the support of more than 70 state lawmakers. The stated purpose of the bill is to ensure that the recipient spouse becomes self-sufficient within a reasonable amount of time and that alimony does not become a life-long obligation.
The senate bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Cynthia Stone Creem (D-Newton) and Rep. Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley), is much less ambitious and seeks only to include the words "and duration" into the list of factors courts must consider prior to granting alimony. The senate bill has been proposed as a more flexible alternative to the house bill, giving judges the discretion to determine an appropriate length of time for alimony payments without requiring them to follow a strict set of rules.
In response to the growing demand in Massachusetts for a change to its alimony laws, the state legislature has created a joint task force to consider the two bills and other options to change the state's alimony laws. Whether either bill will eventually become law or a new option will come out of the task force, however, is not likely to happen until sometime in 2010.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Rudy Jaworski
Since 1981, our firm's founder, Massachusetts family law attorney Rudolf A. Jaworski, has focused on the negotiation, mediation and trial litigation of both straightforward and complex divorce, child custody and child support disputes.
Copyright RA Jaworski P.C
More information about RA Jaworski P.C
View all articles published by RA Jaworski P.C
Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.
