Nissenbaum Law Offices 617.330.9090
Search the Site  



The court wrote in Chin v Meriott that " the Legislature intended these provisions to apply prospectively is reflected in the language of several uncodified provisions of the alimony reform act, which we consider together with the codified provisions at issue here."

  Watch Appeal of Chin v. Merriot (Link)

The court wrote in  Doktor v Doktor that "the Legislature intended the retirement provision to have prospective application;consequently, it is not applicable to modification of the alimony judgment in this case. Chin v. Merriot, supra."

     Watch Appeal of Doktor v. Doktor (Link)

The court wrote in Rodman v Rodman that "General Lawsc. 208, 49 (f), does not apply retroactively to alimony orders in divorce judgments that entered before March 1, 2012."

  Watch Appeal of Rodman v. Rodman (Link)




Jerry Nissenbaum on Cover of Boston Magazine - Best Lawyer

About the Firm

The information contained in this web site is not legal advice; it is for educational purposes only. Use of does not create an attorney/client relationship between you and Nissenbaum Hickey, even if you provide this web site, whether by e-mail or through one of its software programs, with your personal or confidential information. If you are in the process of (or contemplating) a divorce or involved in any legal matter, you should hire a lawyer.

Copyright Notice
Copyright 2017 Wendy Hickey Law. All rights reserved. Reuse or copying of any material contained within this web site is by permission only, unless otherwise specified. Direct your questions about permissions to Nissenbaum Hickey.

Barry Weinstein Webmaster.