North Shore couple’s divorce tests state’s new alimony law

Aug. 02--MARBLEHEAD -- In one of the first legal challenges of the state's 2011 alimony reform law, the Supreme Judicial Court has concluded that a Marblehead woman is entitled to no more than five years of "rehabilitative" alimony from her investment analyst husband, and not the general, or long-term, alimony she was seeking.

But the court also upheld a finding that Carolyn Balas-Zaleski was entitled to 35 percent of her husband's income during those five years, rather than an amount solely based on "need," because the couple had lived an "upper middle-class lifestyle" that included travel, boating, private schools for the children and other luxuries.

The SJC sent the case back to Salem Probate and Family Court, however, because it found that Judge Amy Blake had erred when she based the amount of alimony on Stephen Zaleski's$400,000-a-year base salary, without factoring in annual bonuses that in some years had nearly doubled that amount.

Blake did not order child support for the couple's teenage children, but did not make it clear whether the alimony order of $11,667 a month Zaleski was supposed to pay -- a total of 35 percent of his base salary -- was intended to also support the children.

The SJC also found that Carolyn Balas-Zaleski shouldn't have been required to maintain a costly, $1.6 million life insurance policy that would go to her husband if she died, something that her lawyers had argued would create a windfall of cash for her former husband.

"We conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion to award rehabilitative alimony, and that the allocation of debt and division of property between the parties was warranted by the evidence," Justice Fernande Duffly wrote in the court's decision.

"Nonetheless, we remand for further proceedings based on our determination that it was error not to include all of the husband's income in the calculation of the amount of alimony, and that there was no basis in the judge's findings to require the wife to maintain life insurance policies as security."

The court had solicited friend-of-the-court briefs in the case, which was being watched by lawyers specializing in divorce law.

Under the state's new law, which went into effect two years ago, there are now four types of alimony: general alimony, which is for the longest period of time, based on the length of the marriage; rehabilitative alimony, which is intended to help a former spouse re-establish a career; reimbursement alimony, often a one-time payment; and transitional alimony.

But it offers a glimpse into the lives of a couple dramatically different from those in the hardship stories that emerged during the campaign for passage of the new alimony law. At the time, advocates for the new law cited cases of middle-income workers unable to retire because of alimony payments, and new spouses required to contribute to payments to their partner's ex.

This couple, married for more than 16 years, had maintained a lifestyle that was, the courts concluded, "beyond their means" despite both being high earners for much of the marriage.

"They dined out, vacationed, joined a yacht club, and owned boats, luxury vehicles" -- including a Porsche Cayenne, an Audi A8 and a Grady White motorboat -- "and a second home," Justice Duffly noted. "... The children attended private schools. The husband held membership in a fish and game club, while the wife was a member of a tennis club."

Still, their only assets at the time of the trial was the $322,000 equity in their Marblehead home and the balances in their retirement accounts.

Blake concluded that Balas-Zaleski, who lost her job as a pharmaceutical sales representative in 2007 and then decided to stay home with her children, should be capable of once again earning the six-figure salary she once pulled down, even in another field.

Balas-Zaleski and her lawyers had disputed that, noting that she has been unable to land a comparable job and that there is no evidence that she will become "self-sufficient" within five years.

The SJC disagreed.

Courts reporter Julie Manganis can be reached at 978-338-2521, via email at [email protected] or on Twitter @SNJulieManganis.

___

(c)2014 The Salem News (Beverly, Mass.)

Visit The Salem News (Beverly, Mass.) at www.salemnews.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services