David M. Gabriel & Associates

Massachusetts SJC Changes Alimony and Child Support Calculations

The Supreme Judicial Court’s recent decision in the case of Cavanaugh v. Cavanaugh has had a major impact on how alimony and child support are calculated in Massachusetts family court cases. The court’s decision, which was issued in June 2022, has revised the way in which income is considered when determining support payments, and has introduced a new approach to calculating alimony and child support in cases where both elements of support are involved. One of the key changes brought about by the Cavanaugh decision is the inclusion of employer contributions to retirement as income when determining support payments. This decision has significant implications for those who are going through a divorce, as it will impact the amount of support that is paid. Those who are seeking support payments, or who are going through a divorce, should understand the implications of this decision and be prepared to consider the impact of employer contributions on their support payments. Calculating Alimony and Child Support Another important aspect of the Cavanaugh decision is the introduction of a new approach to calculating alimony and child support in cases where both elements of support are involved. Previously, child support was calculated first, which often made an alimony calculation unnecessary. However, under the Cavanaugh decision, alimony should be calculated first. This new approach involves adding the alimony payment to the payee’s income and subtracting it from the payor’s income, and then using these new incomes to run the Child Support Guidelines. In September 2022, the SJC

Read More »

Alimony Modification

Representing the Husband.  Defending against an increase in alimony.  The parties with three children were divorced after 23 years of marriage.  The Husband re-married.    Some years later, upon emancipation of the youngest child, the child support ceased and the Wife commenced receiving a fixed amount of alimony pursuant to the terms of the divorce judgment.  Thereafter, she filed a Complaint for Modification seeking an increase in alimony claiming that Husband’s income had increased substantially since the divorce.   Husband’s income had increased substantially from $2700.00 weekly to $6300.00 weekly, however, Wife’s income had increased as well, and her financial circumstances improved.   The matter proceeded to trial.  After trial, the court found that Wife’s expenses were inflated and that her income far exceeded the expenses required to maintain the modest lifestyle enjoyed by the parties during the marriage.  Wife’s counsel was repeatedly prevented over objection by Husband’s counsel from introducing evidence and testimony during the course of trial.  Wife’s complaint for modification was dismissed based upon a lack of material or substantial change in circumstances.

Read More »

Motion to Vacate Restraining Order

Representing the defendant.  The defendant was alleged to have assaulted and threatened a relative with physical harm resulting in the issuance of a 1 year restraining order.  Defendant was not represented by counsel.  Defendant retained our office.  A motion to vacate the restraining order with extensive memorandum and supporting case law, was filed and allowed, resulting in the restraining order being vacated.

Read More »

Underemployed Husband At Time Of Divorce

Representing the Wife.   The parties were married for over 22 years at the commencement of the action and had two children, ages 15 and 11, with special needs.  The matter was tried.  The court found that the Husband dissipated marital assets including retirement funds and was underemployed at the time of the divorce.  The Husband demonstrated little if any interest in the children.  The Wife received a substantially greater share of the marital estate and was granted sole legal and physical custody of the minor children, after trial.

Read More »

Motion to Dismiss Husband’s Complaint for Modification of Custody

Representing former Wife.  Husband filed action concerning care and custody of minor child three years earlier.   Wife previously moved out of state with court permission.   Father failed to prosecute action.  Mother filed a motion to dismiss Father’s complaint under the Massachusetts Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (Chapter 209B §7) and Forum non conveniens (M.G.L. Chapter 223A § 5).   Mother alleged that the action was no longer properly before the Massachusetts, despite having been brought at a time when the parties were living in Massachusetts.  Mother alleged that such an action should proceed in the child’s home state.  The court agreed and the matter was dismissed.

Read More »

Complaint for Modification of Child Support

Representing the former Wife, in opposition to the Husband’s complaint, seeking to reduce child support.   During the course of the proceeding, it was learned that Husband represented by way of affidavit in a collateral proceeding that his gross monthly income was substantially higher than as represented on his rule 401 financial statements.   Mother through counsel conducted discovery, seeking former Husband’s business records, which Husband failed to produce after being ordered to do so by the Court.  Mother filed a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with the Court’s discovery orders and for attorney fees, which was allowed.

Read More »

Post-Divorce Complaint for Out-of-State Removal

Representing former wife in post-divorce action for Removal, seeking permission to relocate to another state.    Father opposed Mother’s complaint for removal and sought to prohibit Mother from moving out of state with the parties’ minor child.  The matter was tried.  Mother was granted permission to move.

Read More »

Complaint for Modification of Custody

Representing the former wife (Mother) in a post-divorce complaint for modification, seeking to modify existing judgment granting husband (Father) joint legal custody and parenting time with two minor children of the marriage.     Mother alleged that Father was abusive, suffering from substance abuse and mental health issues.  Mother alleged that Father was incapable of safely caring for the children.  Extensive cross examination of court appointed guardian ad litem.  Result in Mother’s favor.  Mother granted sole legal and physical custody of the children after trial. Father granted restricted supervised parenting time with professional supervisor at Father’s sole expenses.

Read More »
Ask a question…
close slider

Life Complicated?
We Can Help

Fill out the form below and tell us your story.

Call Now Button