Legal Opinion

Van Arsdale v. Van Arsdale

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 31, 2017No. SJC 12223PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLowy, J.

This appeal raises the conshtuhonality of applying the durational limits of the Alimony Reform Act of 2011 (act), St. 2011, c. 124, to certain alimony agreements predating the act’s effective date. We conclude that the application of the act’s durational limits to certain alimony agreements that predate the act is not unconstitutionally retroactive because the statute does not attach “new legal consequences to events completed before its enactment.” Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 270 (1994). We also conclude that the Probate and Family Court judge did not abuse her discretion when…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Doe v. Sex Offender Registry BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  3. Chin v. MerriotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
  4. Pierce v. PierceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  5. Tobin's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Popp v. PoppMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2017
  2. Balistreri v. BalistreriMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018
  3. Hanley v. HanleyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018
  4. Ricard v. DuttonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API