“Don’t hold together what must fall apart. The familiar life crumbles so the new life can begin.”
— Bryant McGill
Staying hydrated is good for both marathons and divorces!
A friend recently sent me that quote. I love it because it’s so hopeful. February and March are historically a very busy time for new divorce filings. In general, divorce attorneys see a lot of new clients in the first quarter of any year. While gyms fill up in the new year as well, it’s been my experience more folks follow through with resolutions to end their marriages, than with resolutions to get fit. A sorry commentary, superficially, but it can be hopeful or even positive when looked at in the light of the quote above.
We’re all dreaming of warmer climates.
Spring vacation is almost here for many private schools and April vacation is just around the corner. Whether you’re taking the kids on vacation by yourself for the first time or you’re going to be the parent staying home, these tips will help ensure your travel plans run effortlessly!
As promised, here is an in-depth explanation of the new decisions from the Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) on the Alimony Reform Act, by my talented and knowledgeable partner, Robin Lynch Nardone.
Robin Lynch Nardone, Partner at Burns & Levinson LLP
On January 30, 2015, the SJC issued three decisions with significant impact on the right to seek modification of an alimony order issued prior to the enactment of Massachusetts’ Alimony Reform Act. The uncodified provisions of the alimony reform act are what the SJC has relied on in determining that only the durational limits on payment of alimony apply to alimony cases decided before March 1, 2012, while the retirement provisions and cohabitation provisions do not. Uncodified provisions of an act express the legislature’s view on some aspect of the act’s operation and are not the source of the substantive provisions of the law. Below are the details on the three cases.