Openshaw v. Openshaw Decision Sets Precedent by Considering Savings in Child Support Calculations in Massachusetts | Conn Kavanaugh

A recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision has broadened the court's view of what constitutes marital lifestyle when awarding alimony. Traditionally, the analysis when awarding alimony in divorce cases is based on the recipient's “need” for support and the payer's ability to pay. The “needs” analysis focused on marital lifestyle – how often and where the parties vacationed, what type of vehicles they drove, where they lived, etc.

However, noticeably absent from the lifestyle analysis was any consideration of how a couple's savings behavior affected their marital lifestyle and whether savings should be viewed as a “need” as the basis for awarding alimony. The Court's decision in Openshaw v. Openshaw examines one of the core aspects of married couples' financial lives: the shared decision to prioritize saving as part of the marital lifestyle and the “need” for support. It is a recognition of the legal system that a couple's financial habits – including their propensity to save – are an integral part of their life together and should be considered as part of the “needs” analysis when awarding maintenance.

Imagine a couple who saved for retirement or their child's education during their marriage instead of opting for extravagant things. As a result, they took few vacations, lived in a modest home, but had accumulated significant savings. Compare this lifestyle to a couple who vacationed frequently and spent a lot of money but had minimal savings. Before Openshaw, the recipient's spouse who overspent performed better in an alimony award than the spouse who saved – because savings were not a factor in the lifestyle analysis. According to Openshaw, a couple's savings pattern is part of their marital lifestyle.

In Openshaw the maintenance recipient wanted to recognize the couple's saving habits as an important aspect of their lifestyle. This approach expands the understanding of marital lifestyle to include values ​​and practices in addition to visible expenses. This ruling marks a transition to examining how both partners can maintain their savings habits post-divorce. It values ​​fairness and aims to preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the lifestyle the couple has carefully built together – including their money management practices – for each individual.

In the decision, the court notes that the meaning of the alimony law requires that a judge “must consider the 'marital lifestyle' and the 'ability of each party to maintain the marital lifestyle'” and that it “requires taking into account the savings therein.” “Where the evidence shows that it was a regular practice during the marriage.”

The logic of this ruling is to find a fair solution, since the court states that “a fair distribution of the marital estate ensures that both parties enjoy the benefits of regular savings during the marriage in the form of marital assets.” In this case, the court stated that “the parties' income following dissolution is sufficient for each party to continue to live the marital lifestyle” and noted that “if routine saving is not taken into account in the context of determining alimony, the Recipient spouse will be forced to rely on the appreciation of current assets while the paying spouse will be able to fully continue the marital lifestyle, including regular savings.”

So what might sustenance look like in a post-Openshaw Massachusetts? Consider this situation. A couple earning a combined annual income of $250,000 consistently saved 20% of their income. Before Openshaw, alimony calculations may have focused solely on her spending habits, ignoring the $50,000 set aside annually for savings. According to Openshaw, this saving behavior could now be factored into the alimony calculation, potentially increasing the recipient's compensation to reflect the importance of continuing this financial approach post-divorce. However, for a couple with the same income who spend a lot of money without saving, the Openshaw decision is unlikely to change the calculation significantly because their marital lifestyle has already been fully taken into account when deciding on maintenance.

Ultimately, the Openshaw ruling marks a turning point in family law in Massachusetts. It expands the definition of lifestyle to include the material aspects of daily life and the financial tactics that form the basis of a married couple's life together. This ruling will have far-reaching implications moving forward, impacting the process and resolution of divorces as well as how couples perceive and manage their finances throughout their marriage.