Home
About the Firm
Our Attorneys
Areas of Expertise
Employment
Document Library
News
Contact Us
 
Soldier On


 
Attorney Carla Newton - A Light at the End of the Tunnel… Or Just a Flicker: The Future of Alimony Beyond Retirement
July 25, 2010 | MINDING YOUR BUSINESS Articles and Case Digests That Impact Your Business and Life
Carla W. Newton, Esq.

 

The recently decided Rudolph F. Pierce vs. Carneice G. Pierce, 455 Mass 286, 916 N.E. 2d 330 (2009) was one of the most closely followed family law cases in recent years. The case generated significant interest because it directly addressed whether a payor's retirement from employment created a rebuttable presumption that alimony payments should be terminated. In this case, the parties' 32 year marriage ended in divorce in 1999. Rudolph was initially obligated to pay Carneice $110,000 in alimony per year. Nine years later, after a long and successful legal career, Rudolph voluntarily retired at age 65. He had remarried and his current wife was still employed. Carneice was unemployed at the time of the trial (though she had become employed after the divorce at a significant salary and left her position shortly before the trial) and was a few years short of access to social security. Rudolph asked the court to terminate his alimony obligation. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ("SJC") denied his request. While acknowledging that retirement was an important factor to be considered in deciding whether to terminate alimony, the SJC ruled that standing alone, retirement did not provide an automatic termination to an alimony obligation. Additional factors including: (i) the financial impact of the termination of alimony on the recipient spouse; (ii) the opportunity for continued employment income available to the payor spouse; and (iii) the inclusion of "retirement" as an event that would entitle the payor to termination or modification of alimony as a term in the original agreement between the parties, would need to be considered in any decision to terminate alimony upon retirement. After considering these additional factors, the court granted Rudolph a significant decrease in his alimony obligation, but it denied his request for a termination of that obligation.

Contact Info:
Carla W. Newton, Esq. (413) 732-2301
Send Email

Related Stories:
Attorney Carla Newton to Speak at MCLE Seminar on "Sophisticated Issues in Western Massachusetts Family Law Practice".
February 02, 2010 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.

Attorney Carla Newton to Speak at MCLE Alimony Summit
August 25, 2009 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.

Attorney Carla Newton Completes Second-Tier Training in Collaborative Practice
May 12, 2009 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.

Attorney Carla Newton Completes Advanced Training in Collaborative Practice
December 04, 2008 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.

Newton Writes on the Collaborative Divorce Process
February 01, 2007 | Robinson Donovan, P.C.

Carla Newton taught at Fifth Annual Western Massachusetts Bankruptcy Law Conference Course
October 21, 2006

Newton promoted to Chair of SPHS Trustees
October 01, 2005 | Western Massachusetts Healthcare News

Carla Newton Elected Chairwoman of Sisters of Providence Health System Board of Trustees
July 24, 2005 | The Sunday Republican

Making Her Case: Carla Newton Focuses Her Career and Community Work on Family
May 16, 2005 | BusinessWest: Attorney Profile Series

- Back -