Snow v. Snow
476 Mass. 425
| Mass. | 2017Background
- Wife and husband divorced by default judgment in New York (July 21, 2010); wife had requested maintenance but did not pursue it and New York judge made no alimony-specific findings.
- Wife (then pro se) filed an action in Massachusetts Probate & Family Court on Aug 25, 2014, seeking alimony as an initial claim (characterized below as modification but treated by SJC as initial petition).
- Trial judge awarded temporary alimony (Jan 23, 2015) and later general term alimony of $810/week starting May 8, 2015, ending Dec 21, 2029 (judge treated durational limit as starting with first temporary payment).
- Trial judge calculated husband’s income using base pay only, excluding overtime because he found it immaterial at time of divorce; judge did not address health insurance provision for the wife.
- Both parties appealed; Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) transferred case to itself and reviewed whether the Massachusetts action was an initial alimony claim, when the durational limit begins, whether overtime must be included in income for an initial award, and whether the judge must address health insurance under G. L. c. 208, § 34.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Snow) | Defendant's Argument (Snow) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the Massachusetts petition an initial alimony complaint under G. L. c. 208, § 34, or a modification under § 37/§ 49? | Wife argued her petition was an initial complaint seeking alimony not adjudicated in NY. | Husband argued NY divorce adjudicated maintenance (wife requested but received none). | Held: It was an initial complaint under § 34 because NY judge did not make statutory-factor findings and wife did not pursue maintenance in NY. |
| When does the durational limit for general term alimony under G. L. c. 208, § 49(b) begin to run? | Wife: durational limit should start at date of award of general term alimony (May 5, 2015). | Husband: durational limit should begin at date of divorce judgment (July 21, 2010). | Held: Durational limit begins when general term alimony is awarded (not at divorce judgment or temporary alimony). |
| Must overtime income be considered in an initial alimony award? | Wife: Judge must include husband’s overtime in income for initial alimony determination. | Husband: Overtime need not be included because it arose after divorce or was immaterial. | Held: For an initial complaint under § 34, income includes overtime per the child support guideline definition; judge must consider post-judgment overtime. |
| Must the judge expressly address health insurance under § 34 when awarding initial alimony? | Wife: Judge must determine and order health insurance coverage or reimbursement as required by § 34. | Husband: Prior NY judgment assigned wife responsibility; Massachusetts judge noted wife not eligible through husband but made no express § 34 finding. | Held: Judge erred by failing to make the § 34 determination; when awarding under § 34 the judge must explicitly address availability and include appropriate provision. |
Key Cases Cited
- Holmes v. Holmes, 467 Mass. 653 (held durational limit runs from award of general term alimony)
- George v. George, 476 Mass. 65 (courts must consider present circumstances when setting alimony)
- Cherrington v. Cherrington, 404 Mass. 267 (initial alimony may be sought after divorce; no material-change requirement for initial award)
- Zaleski v. Zaleski, 469 Mass. 230 (income for support purposes follows child support guideline definition)
- Zeh v. Zeh, 35 Mass. App. Ct. 260 (judges must make explicit § 34 findings and provide for health insurance or reimbursement)