A recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision has broadened the Court’s view on what constitutes the marital lifestyle when awarding alimony. Historically, when awarding alimony in divorce cases, the analysis is based upon a recipient’s “need” for support and a payor’s ability to pay. The “need” analysis focused on the marital lifestyle—how frequently and where the parties vacationed, what type of vehicles they drove, where they lived, etc.
Yet, noticeably absent from the lifestyle analysis was any consideration for how a couple’s saving patterns factored into their marital lifestyle and whether savings should be considered “need” as a basis to award alimony. The Court’s ruling in Openshaw v. Openshaw examines one of the core aspects of the financial lives of married couples: the joint choice to prioritize saving money as part of the marital lifestyle and “need” for alimony. It’s a recognition from the legal system that a couple’s financial habits—including their tendency to save—are an essential part of their shared life and should be considered as part of the “needs” analysis when awarding alimony.
Imagine a couple who, during their marriage, saved for retirement or their child’s education instead of splurging on extravagant things. As a result, they vacationed minimally, resided in a modest home, but had amassed considerable savings. Contrast this lifestyle to a couple who vacationed frequently and spent lavishly but had minimal savings. Prior to Openshaw, the recipient spouse who spent extravagantly fared better in an alimony award than a spouse who saved–because savings were not a factor in the lifestyle analysis. Post Openshaw, a couple’s saving pattern is part of the marital lifestyle.
In Openshaw, the alimony recipient sought recognition of the couple’s saving habits as a significant aspect of their lifestyle. This approach broadens the understanding of marital lifestyle to include values and practices in addition to visible spending. This ruling marks a shift towards examining how both partners can maintain their savings habits after divorce. It emphasizes fairness, aiming to uphold the lifestyle the couple has carefully built together—including their money management practices—as much as possible for each individual.
In the decision, the Court states that alimony statute’s meaning necessitates that a judge “must consider the ‘marital lifestyle’ and the ‘ability of each party to maintain the marital lifestyle’” and that it “requires consideration of saving where the evidentiary record shows it was a regular practice during the marriage.”
The logic of this ruling is centered upon finding a fair solution, as the Court notes that “an equitable distribution of the marital estate ensures that both parties reap the benefits of regular saving during the marriage in the form of the marital assets.” In this case, the Court said that “the parties’ post-dissolution income is sufficient for each party to continue to live the marital lifestyle” and noted that “if routine saving is not considered in connection with the determination of alimony, the recipient spouse will be forced to rely on the appreciation of current assets while the payor spouse will be able to continue the full extent of the marital lifestyle, including regular saving.”
So, what might alimony look like in a post-Openshaw Massachusetts? Consider this situation. A couple earning a combined annual income of $250,000 consistently saved 20% of their income. Pre-Openshaw, alimony calculations might have focused solely on their spending habits, which overlooks the $50,000 annually allocated to savings. Post-Openshaw, this saving behavior could now be factored into the alimony calculation, potentially increasing the recipient’s award to reflect the importance of continuing this financial approach post-divorce. On the other hand, for a couple with the same income who spent lavishly without saving, the Openshaw decision might not alter the calculation significantly, as their marital lifestyle was already fully accounted for when ruling on alimony.
Ultimately, the Openshaw ruling signifies a moment in family law in Massachusetts. It expands the definition of lifestyle to encompass the material aspects of daily life and the financial tactics that form the foundation of a married couple’s shared life. This ruling will have wide-ranging ramifications as we move forward, impacting the process and resolution of divorces and how couples perceive and handle their finances throughout their marriage.
