Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label Supreme Judicial Court

Social Security Benefits in Divorce

In Divorce nothing is as simple as it may seem at first. This is just one of the reasons it's vitally important to obtain good financial and legal advice during the divorce process. Social Security is an example of how something that seems simple can actually be a very complicated discussion in divorce. Consider the question: Can Social Security benefits be transferred or divided as part of a divorce? The simple answer is no. The more complicated answer is that while the benefit itself cannot be transferred, Social Security does provide for benefits for divorced spouses in certain circumstances, and many courts have also ruled that the amount of a Social Security benefit can affect other determinations. For example, in Massachusetts the case of Mahoney v. Mahoney , held that the court could consider the Social Security benefit owed to the husband in that case when determining the equitable division of the wife's retirement benefit. In Mahoney, the trial Judge awarde...

Harassment Prevention Orders - 2 SJC Decisions

On January 28, 2014, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court released two decisions that significantly affect the ability to obtain a Harassment Prevention Order in Massachusetts. Harassment Prevention Orders in Massachusetts are governed by M.G.L. c. 258E , which defines Harassment as follows: “Harassment”, (i) 3 or more acts of willful and malicious conduct aimed at a specific person committed with the intent to cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property and that does in fact cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property... In Smith v. Mastalerz (SJC-11011039. January 28, 2014 - available here ), the SJC clarifies what constitutes 3 or more acts.  The trial Judge found that the Defendant driving by the Plaintiff three times all within a short period of time counted as 3 separate acts.  However the SJC disagreed "with the judge that driving by the plaintiff constituted three separate acts of harassment."  In addition, the lower court had not ma...

Is it Easier to Remove a Child of Unmarried Parents from the Commonwealth?

This past summer we posted a full blog series on issues facing Unmarried Parents in Massachusetts .  While many issues that unmarried parents face may be different than those faced by married parents, most of the issues will be the same.  Parenting a child still comes with may of the same worries, financial obligations, affections, and lessons, regardless of the parents' relationship with each other.  However, when legal realities collide with economic or practical realities, there may be significant differences in how unmarried parents are treated. Removal cases are one example of this disparity in Massachusetts.  Removal is a legal term of art for the simple concept of when one parent wants to move their residence out of state and take their child with them.  In Massachusetts, M.G.L. c. 208 Section 30 covers the removal of minor children in a divorce case, and prohibits removal without consent of both parents or order of the court.  We explore in what ...

Are Complaints for Contempt getting Harder to Win?

A Complaint for Contempt is the action by which you can request that the Court make a finding and issue sanctions for failure of one party to meet the obligations and requirements of a Court Order or Judgment.  Sanctions can include civil fines, payment of attorney's fees and costs, modification to existing orders or judgments, or in some cases incarceration. To succeed on a Complaint for Contempt you must prove two things: first, you must prove that there has been a "clear and unambiguous" order or judgment and second, you must prove that the other party "knowingly violated" the order. If the Contempt involves a financial order, depending on the remedy you are seeking, the US Supreme Court case of Turner v. Rogers  may also now require that you prove an "ability to pay."  Traditionally in Massachusetts the Court's have allowed "inability to pay" an order as a defense to certain enforcement attempts (such as incarceration).  This w...

SCOTUS avoids 14th Amendment analysis on Prop 8 through Standing Analysis, Still a Win?

In the second of a pair of same-sex marriage rights cases, the Supreme Court of the United States refused to deal with the substantive issue declaring a lack of standing instead.  In deciding the case on standing the Court avoided addressing the constitutionality of denying same-sex couples the right to marry.  However, in deciding the issue on standing the majority decision can be read to condone the actions of the public officials who refused to defend Prop 8. Known as the Prop 8 case (a/k/a Prop H8), everything you need to know about Hollingsworth v. Perry is summarized below: Prior to reaching SCOTUS here is what happened: California Supreme Court follow Massachusetts in declaring denial of same-sex marriages in violation of the California Constitution. California voters then pass Proposition 8, amending the California Constitution to define marriage for opposite sex couples only. Same-sex couples sued California's governor and state and local officials claimin...

Does the court consider tax consequences in a divorce?

As the income tax filing deadline approaches, we are all wondering how we can reduce our income tax bill and increase our refund.  Anyone who is considering divorce, going through a divorce, or has been divorced should consider how their divorce case could affect that tax bill. We previously posted a series on Divorce & Taxes including the following topics: Divorce and Taxes: Issue #1. Marital Status Divorce & Taxes - Issue #2. Child Support v. Alimony Divorce and Taxes: Issue #3. Child Dependency Exemptions. Divorce and Taxes: Issue #4. Property Transfers. Divorce and Taxes: Issue #5. Joint Tax Liability. Divorce and Taxes: Issue #6. Same Sex Marriages. Whenever any of these issues arise in a case, it is imperative that divorcing spouses and their counsel consider the tax consequences when negotiating a settlement. In a recent opinion, the Massachusetts SJC confirmed the importance of considering income tax consequences of divorce orders and specificall...

Where you get Divorced matters! - British woman loses rights to £1.2 Million Pension

Every state (and every country) has standards for jurisdiction that decide whether or not you can bring a divorce case to their courts. Where you can file for divorce is an important question because the laws of the state or county where you will file will control how your divorce case is resolved, and those laws can differ significantly. A British woman was recently denied access to file divorce in the United Kingdom courts because her and her Husband last lived together in France. According to The Daily Telegraph , this decision will result in her losing any rights she might have had to her Husband's £1.2m pension. The laws can also differ greatly by state. In Massachusetts, for instance, the court can consider potential inheritance as an opportunity "for future acquisition of capital assets and income" and award alimony or assign property to one spouse or the other based on that consideration. In many other states inheritance or potential inheritance cannot be co...

Retirement Does Not Stop Alimony - The Pierce Decision

UPDATE: There is pending legislation for major changes to the alimony statute in Massachusetts. The Alimony Reform Act of 2011 was filed on January 18, 2011 and you can learn more about the Act at MassAlimonyFormula.com or in our recent blog post highlighting the differences between the bill and the current law . A much awaited decision from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was published today: Pierce v. Pierce, SJC - 10381, Nov. 9, 2009 . In this case, the Husband had agreed to an alimony order of $110,000 per year after a 32 year marriage, and had voluntarily retired at age 65. Upon retirement, the Husband filed a Complaint for Modification seeking the elimination of his alimony. The trial Judge reduced the alimony to $42,000 per year but declined to terminate alimony. The Pierce appeal centered around the Husband's claim that there should be a presumption that alimony ends upon retirement. Without that presumption, the Husband argues, the person receiving ali...