Massachusetts Divorce Separation Agreement Modification Alimony Obligation Lawyers Attorneys

RUDOLPH F. PIERCE vs. CARNEICE G. PIERCE.

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS

FACTS:

The plaintiff, Rudolph F. Pierce, was married to the defendant, Carneice G. Pierce, for thirty-two years until their divorce on August 26, 1999. As part of their separation agreement, which was merged in relevant part with the judgment of divorce nisi (divorce judgment), Rudolph was required to pay Carneice $ 110,000 per year as alimony for her support and maintenance. In March, 2008, at the age of sixty-five, Rudolph voluntarily retired as a partner at the law firm where he had practiced and became "of counsel" to the firm. In April, 2008, he filed a motion in the Probate and Family Court to amend his earlier complaint for modification of the divorce judgment, asking the court to eliminate his alimony obligation to Carneice because of his retirement. After an evidentiary hearing, the judge allowed Rudolph's complaint for modification to the extent that the judge reduced the amount of the alimony to $ 42,000 per year. Rudolph now appeals from the modification of the divorce judgment, contending that the judge abused her discretion by failing to terminate Rudolph's alimony obligation. Rudolph also appeals from the judge's failure to grant a retroactive reduction in alimony for calendar year 2007, in view of the significant decline in his earned income that year resulting from his gradual withdrawal from active employment.

ISSUES:

The following is the issue to be decided:

Whether a former spouse's voluntary retirement from employment at or beyond the customary age of sixty-five should create a rebuttable presumption under the statutes governing the award of alimony (G. L. c. 208, 34, 37) that any alimony obligation owed by the retiring spouse should be terminated.

DISCUSSION:

Voluntary retirement at a customary age is simply one factor, albeit an important one, to be considered by the judge in deciding whether to modify the alimony obligation set forth in a divorce judgment. The judge did not abuse her discretion in finding that a reduction in the amount of alimony, but not a termination of alimony, was warranted in view of the totality of the circumstances, which in this case included not only Rudolph's age and wish to retire but also Carneice's recent loss of employment and desire to postpone her application for Social Security benefits until she became eligible for full retirement benefits. The judge found that, under the terms of the separation agreement, Rudolph owed and was required to pay Carneice $ 41,107, which represented, in the judge's calculation; the pro rated portion of the annual $ 62,000 payment attributable to the period from January 1, 2007, to the date Rudolph served the complaint for modification on Carneice -- August 31, 2007. When balancing a support provider's wish to retire against a recipient spouse's continuing financial need, the judge must consider all the statutory criteria in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 208, 34, as they relate to both parties, not simply the party seeking a reduction in the alimony judgment. The multiple factors set forth in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 208, 34, and the obligation of a judge deciding an alimony judgment to consider all the factors, including the opportunity of each party for future acquisition of income, reflect the complexity of the alimony decision, the unique set of circumstances posed by every case, and the need to fashion an alimony judgment that imposes a fair balance of sacrifice in each case. Section 34 does not place any one of its mandatory considerations above any other; constrained by its directives, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has declined to do so on its own. It also does not agree that the age of the supporting spouse, taken in isolation, should always be the most significant factor in a judge's evaluation of alimony. Every supporting spouse is permitted to retire, and an alimony judgment based on the supporting spouse's earned income eventually will need to be reduced or terminated to reflect the supporting spouse's diminished actual income after retirement. The supporting spouse, however, is not entitled unilaterally to retire regardless of the financial hardship such retirement may cause the recipient spouse. In appropriate circumstances, the supporting spouse, even after reaching a customary retirement age, in the sound discretion of the probate judge, may be expected temporarily to postpone retirement or to find part-time work to help the recipient spouse weather difficult financial circumstances. Probate judges have full power and authority under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 208, 37, to modify judgments for alimony entered in divorce proceedings not only as to the future, but also as to arrears. Because a judge has authority to modify alimony payments due in arrears, a decision not to make a modification constitutes an exercise of discretion under 37.

JUDGMENT:

The high court affirmed the modification judgment, vacated that part of the order that directed the husband to pay alimony arrears to the wife, and remanded the case to the trial court so it could 1) consider parol evidence and make findings on the interpretation of the separation agreement's payment provisions, and 2) make findings of fact and give reasons supporting its decision as to whether the husband was entitled to retrospective relief.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.

Massachusetts Divorce Separation Agreement Modification Alimony Obligation Lawyers Attorneys

By: Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

POST COMMENT

How Important Is The Role Of A Great Divorce Lawyer Why Need A Criminal Defense Lawyer In A Dui Charge? Why Retirement Planning Is Essential Make Money Investing In Silver Bullion Coins K1 Visa Laos: Finding A Licensed American Lawyer For A Laotian Fiancee Why A Protection Lawyer Can Be So Essential Do I need a criminal defense lawyer and how do I find one Searching for a Divorce Lawyer in St. Louis Why Involve a Divorce Lawyer? San Diego Habitat for Humanity | The Retirement Group: Your Partners In Retirement The Retirement Group | Just in Time for Foster Youth Why It Is Necessary To Get Assistance Of Property Lawyer Florida Patent Application Made Easy with an IP Lawyer