Listen to this article
A Probate and Family Court judge acted properly when he took into account a couple's custom of putting a significant portion of their income toward savings when setting the amount of spousal support, the Supreme Court ruled.
Judge Dalila Argaez Wendlandt (SAM DORAN/STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE)
“This case is the first time we have been asked to consider the question of whether a judge should take into account a divorcing couple's habit of making regular contributions to their savings plans when making a decision under GLc 208, §53 (Maintenance Act or §53). can. , the amount of maintenance required to maintain the marital lifestyle. Where, as here, the record establishes that ongoing, regular saving throughout the long-term marriage was part of the couple's standard of living and that the parties' combined income following dissolution is sufficient to enable both spouses to enjoy the benefits enjoyed throughout the duration of the marriage Maintaining Living Standards “We conclude that such consideration is appropriate,” Judge Dalila Argaez Wendlandt wrote for the SJC.
“For it is the way a couple consistently distributes marital income – and not just the way they spend it on everyday expenses and luxuries – that determines their standard of living during the marriage, not the limitation , which generally mandates alimony payment “The requirement not to exceed the 'needs' of the receiving spouse, see GLc 208, §53(b), prevents a judge from considering the parties' regular savings practices,” Wendlandt wrote.
“Accordingly, we conclude that when a married couple, as here, has an established practice of saving during marriage, a judge may properly view such saving in awarding alimony as part of the couple's marital lifestyle. “In doing so, we join the vast majority of jurisdictions that have addressed this issue,” she wrote.
The 28-page decision is Openshaw v. Openshaw, Lawyers Weekly No. 10-029-24.
Comments are closed.