Can a Massachusetts Judge Modify an Alimony Agreement After the Fact?

There are a number of reasons why one or both parties to a final divorce judgment might seek modification of its terms. But what about terms resolved through a negotiated settlement agreement? Can a party still request modification if it would alter the terms they previously agreed to in the settlement?

Appeals Court Backs Trial Judge’s Order Increasing Ex-Wife’s Alimony

A recent decision from the Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Steinberg v. Steinberg, helps explain the answers to these questions. In this case, a husband and wife divorced after 22 years of marriage. They negotiated a separation agreement that the court incorporated into the final divorce judgment. Among other terms, the separation agreement specified the now-former husband’s alimony and child support obligations.

Both parties subsequently filed petitions to modify the judgment. The trial court ultimately granted the former wife’s petition and increased the former husband’s child support and alimony obligations. The former husband appealed.

With respect to the issue of alimony, the former husband argued before the Appeals Court that, given the parties resolved this issue in their separation agreement, the trial judge was only allowed to make “minor changes” through a modification petition as opposed to “fundamentally rewriting the separation agreement.” The Appeals Court held there was no legal basis for this argument. Indeed, there was no Massachusetts case law supporting such a position.

The former husband did cite a 1999 decision from the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), Bercume v. Bercume, but the Appeals Court said that did not help his case. In Bercume, the SJC held that when a separation agreement was merged into a divorce judgment, the trial court should “take heed” of the parties’ prior agreement but could still modify the final terms later “consistent with common sense and justice.” Critically, the Bercume decision did not limit a trial court to only making “minor changes.”

More to the point, the separation agreement in Bercume waived both parties’ right to any alimony, yet the SJC held the trial court had the authority to order an award of alimony in a modification proceeding. Given this, the Appeals Court in Steinberg saw no issue with the trial judge modifying an existing alimony order to increase the amount of support. As to the merits of that decision, the Appeals Court said the trial judge acted well within their discretion in finding there had been a “material and substantial change of circumstances” justifying the former wife’s request for modification.

(As for the increase in child support, the Appeals Court said the judgment “already included an upward deviation” from the state’s child support guidelines, so the modification there “was not a new deviation, but a continuation of an existing one.”)

Contact a Peabody Modifications Lawyer

A final judgment of divorce is a snapshot of a moment in time. As your family’s financial and living situation changes, you may need to return to court to seek (or oppose) a modification of the terms of your divorce. Our Peabody modifications attorneys can help. Contact Reade Law Firm, PC, today at 978-767-8383 to schedule a consultation.

Sources:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7330087598978412102

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1049418905681575425