Merged Separation Agreement Divorce

In summary, the main distinction between merged and past concepts is whether you can change a term as part of your separation agreement in the future. The merged terms may be changed after it has been shown that the circumstances have changed significantly. The surviving conditions can only be changed with the agreement of both parties, or the court may make a change in exceptional situations, if any. However, the judiciary to change a surviving term is, in most cases, highly unusual and highly unlikely. It is therefore imperative that you understand what terms can be changed and which terms cannot be changed before signing your divorce agreement. Our courts have decided that a judgment containing a surviving agreement can be amended, but a little more than a “substantial change in circumstances” (the standard for merged agreements) must be presented before an estate judge can refuse the specific performance of the separation agreement. An estate court may amend a judgment containing a surviving agreement if there are “counter-actions,” z.B. when a spouse is at risk of becoming a public tax. Knox v.

Remick, 371 Mass. 433 (1976); Stansel v. Stansel, 385 Mass. 510 (1982); DeCristofaro/ DeCristofaro, 24 Mass. App. Ct. 231 (1987). A separation agreement may remain in the form of an independent contract on certain aspects of the agreement and, as with others, the merger. Gottsegen v. Gottsegen 397 Mass. 617,619.

To speak to a divorce lawyer or other family law cases, contact Mavrides Law in Boston, Newton, or Quincy, MA. To agree on a first consultation, call 617-723-9900 or contact the company in info@mavrideslaw.com About a merger: a separation agreement, the terms of which are transferred by provision in the divorce decision made by the estate court, has no independent meaning. Such an agreement is conditional on a party`s request to amend its assistance. It is also subject to a non-compliance order by the estate judge. Since the estate court can review its own judgment in this case, changes and contempt are possible. To Knox v. Remick 371 Mass 433 (1976), the Dicta Tribunal indicates that such a situation could occur if, on the other hand, the party, which is based on the duration of the contract, has not fully complied with the agreement. (page 437), but our jurisprudence remains silent on other compensatory actions.