Return to Videos

Video Transcript

Robert Bonavito goes over Case Law and covers the following topics: • All cases stress the importance of the CIS. • Case law is important, but impossible to apply 100% to any specific divorce. Hence why sometimes our opinion should supersede the law, which is not very popular with attorneys and judges. • Crews v Crews 2000 case importance of establishing lifestyle: standard of living which can be viewed with the statutory standards, listed in the law. Both parties need to be treated fairly. • A modification in alimony, based on a change of circumstances. • Based on the court testimony they lived a lavish lifestyle that included vacations in Martha’s Vineyard, yacht club membership, etc. but it appeared to be paid from Mr. Crews’ business. • Burden of proof was on Ms. Crews to show the change of circumstances. • The modification was denied, change of circumstances is capped by the marital lifestyle. Lepis v Lepis 1980 case modification • Married in 1961, had three children and divorced in 1974. Wife sought modification. • Supporting spouse’s obligation is mainly determined by the quality of economic life during the marriage. • The moving party must demonstrate the change of circumstances. • Child support needs to increase, must demonstrate that the original agreement did not provide for new issues. • Increase in support is necessary when change of circumstances substantially impair the dependent spouse’s ability to maintain the standard of living reflected in the original divorce decree. • Once burden is met then they can decide if the monied spouse can support the increase in payments • Wife won and court had to reopen the case Mallamo v Mallamo 1995 case • Pendente Lite, prima facie requirement on the party seeking the order. • Pendente Lite preserves the marital status quo; this is unreasonable because it is untenable to maintain the status quo in many situations where now the family has two households and is paying legal and other fees. • Court ruled that reduction in child support did not constitute a retroactive modification. • Importance of establishing an appropriate dependent taillight payment at the onset of a divorce. • Attorney may try to avoid Pendent Lite, alimony and child support, i.e. pay mortgage etc., may affect or reduce alimony amount or time period. • To me case law seems a little suspicious, it is impossible for any case to meet the same exact facts and circumstances as another case. What this means to me is that an expert’s opinion should be able to supersede any of the case law. This upsets attorneys and judges because it upends centuries of legal thought.