Milford Lawmaker Leads House Effort to Restore Legislative Intent

From the General Court of Massachusetts:

(BOSTON) – State Representative John V. Fernandes, D-Milford, who served a major role in ushering in the Alimony Reform Act of 2011, urged his House colleagues on June 22nd to pass corrective legislation designed to restore the legislative intent behind alimony modification after several recent Supreme Judicial Court decisions. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled in three cases that the retirement and cohabitation provisions of the 2011 Alimony Reform Act do not apply to cases decided before March 1, 2012, the effective date of the reform law, which is contrary to what legislative leaders, including Fernandes, have always intended. Fernandes successfully offered language to restore the original intent of the landmark alimony reform law, which stipulated that all payors of alimony who had judgments in effect before, on, or after March 1, 2012 and met the criteria under the provisions of the law could seek modification of their alimony judgments.

“When I led the effort to reform alimony in Massachusetts as House Chairman of the Alimony Reform Task Force, the diverse members of that well-represented group scrutinized every line and every word of a comprehensive reform package, which has since served as a national model for other states to adopt,” stated Fernandes. “The passage of the Alimony Reform Act of 2011 provided for uniformity, consistency and predictability into alimony award judgments and agreements. Therefore, with the prudent action taken this past Wednesday through the unanimous support of my House colleagues, we are well on the road to restoring a critical component of that historic legislation.”

A list of changes Fernandes advocated for in a corrective bill approved on June 22nd included the following provisions:

· The bill restores prior language contained in the 2011 Alimony Reform law that all payors of alimony who had judgments in effect before March 1, 2012 have the same legal options as payors with judgments on or after March 1, 2012.

· A payor may seek modification of an “existing alimony judgment” before March 1, 2012, when the payor has reached full retirement age or when the recipient has been cohabitating with another continuously for 3 months.

· A court shall consider retirement and cohabitation material changes when ruling on a complaint for modification. However, the court may extend alimony if certain deviation factors apply.

· No existing alimony judgment where the parties have agreed in writing that the existing alimony judgment survives or is otherwise not modifiable cannot be modified unless through the consent of both parties.

The bill passed unanimously in the House, 153-0, and now moves onto the Senate.

Image via Shutterstock.