Alimony Reform Act - Alimony Reform Cases in Massachusetts - Massachusetts Divorce Cases

Massachusetts Divorce - Goldstein & Bilodeau, P.C.


About Us

Howard I. Goldstein
David M. Bilodeau

Carmen Brickman

Collaborators & Other Divorce Professionals

Collaborative Divorce Professionals in Massachusetts
Divorce Law Firm &
Divorce Attorney Directory

Divorce Resources & Forms

The Process of Divorce in a Nutshell
Preparing for Divorce
Child Custody in Massachusetts
Child Support in Massachusetts
Prenuptial Agreements
Case on Post Nuptial Agreements
Collaborative Practice
Divorce Law Articles
Massachusetts Divorce Forms
Supplemental Rule 410
Checklist for Divorce
Separation Agreements
Parent Education Programs
Massachusetts Divorce Laws - Chapter 208
Publication 504: Divorced or Separated Individuals
Divorce Resources
Divorce Terminology

>Alimony Calculator Tool

Massachusetts Cases on Family Law & Divorce

Massachusetts Divorce Law Cases


Massachusetts Divorce Cases / Alimony Reform

On this page we are compiling links to the full text of important Massachusetts Appellate Cases on Family Law and Divorce decided by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the Massachusetts Appeals Court.

These cases are for educational purpose only and should not be used for any official or legal purpose. Please consult official reports. Below you will be able to search for Massachusetts Appeals Court Slip Opinions and Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Slip Opinions relating to Alimony Reform.


Alimony Reform Cases in Massachusetts

Doktor v Doktor, SJC-11727, (2015):

Hassey v. Hassey, 85 Mass. App. Ct. 518 - No. 13-P-864 (2014): The husband appealed from a judgment that excluded the wife's interest in real property from the marital estate and awarded her "self-modifying" alimony to account for the husband's future earnings. The husband argued that the order did not follow the provisions of the Alimony Reform Act of 2011. The Appeals Court found that the alimony order did not comply with the act and vacated. The court reasoned that the Probate and Family Court judge considered all the relevant alimony factors except the parties' ability to maintain the martial lifestyle. The judge made no findings regarding the amount of alimony the wife actually needed to maintain the marital lifestyle. Additionally, the court noted that the alimony amount should be based on the parties' needs at the time of the order, the "self-modifying" structure did not fit into one of the specified categories, and the order only imposed certain disclosure requirements on the husband. The court also vacated the property division order because the judge did not make specific findings as to the parties' financial needs and did not adequately account for the wife's interest in the real property.

Holmes v. Holmes - 467 Mass. 653 (2014):

Lalchandani v. Roddy, 86 Mass. App. Ct 819 (2015):

T.E. v. A.O, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 586 (2013):

Rodman v. Rodman SJC-11726 (2015):

Valaskatgis v. Valaskatgis 87 Mass. App. Ct. 756 (2015):

Zeghibe v. Zeghibe, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 614 (2012):




left corner layout image
Copyright 2018, - All rights reserved
right corner layout image
Alimony Reform Act - Alimony Reform Cases in Massachusetts - MA Alimony Reform