Although mostly
unconstitutional this does not stop
Massachusetts judges from doing
what they please, with egos that
think they know what is best for
us all, even when they can only
know a small fraction of what any
parent knows about their children.
-
The determination
of alimony rests in the broad
discretion of the trial court
after a consideration of all
the relevant facts. See Lavalle
v. Lavalle, 3 Mass. App. Ct.
736, 326 N.E.2d 720, 722 (1975).
-
In addition
to or in lieu of alimony,
the Court may assign to either
spouse all or any part of
the estate of the other. M.G.L.A.
c. 208, §
34; See Rice v. Rice,
372 Mass. 398, 400- 01, 361
N.E.2d 1305, 1307(1977).
-
A party has
no right to ignore a feasible
source of income. See Paaar
v. Pagar, 9 Mass. App. Ct
1,4, 397 N.E.2d 1293, 1297
(1980).
-
Where a spouse
is earning less than they
could with reasonable effort,
a trial judge may consider
potential earning power rather
than actual earnings. See
Schuler v. Schuler, 382 Mass.
366, 374, 416 N.E.2d 197,
203-04 (1981).
“Discretion
allows the judge, when determining
the best interests of children, to
consider the widest range of permissible
evidence, including the reports and
testimony of a court appointed investigator
or [guardian ad litem], evidence of
the history of the relationship between
the child and each parent, evidence
of each parent’s present home environment,
and overall fitness to further the
child’s best interests, and the judges
s own impressions upon interviewing
the child privately in chambers.”
Ardizoni, supra, n.23 at 889.
Parents have
no absolute or immutable right
to associate with their children
and their parental rights must
yield to the best interests of
the child. See Donnelly v. Donnelly,
4 Mass. App. Ct. 162, 164, 344
N.E.2d 195, 197 (1976).
All
of these footnotes appear to
come from the same case, you MUST
read the case in its entirety, if
you just use glimpses
of case you could get into
trouble.
I always check the case that my
opposition are using most of the
times they are taking out of content
and have to be corrected. So
read the case on which these case
are coming from and will let you
in on the whole story. Most
of times they are taking out of
context.
One
area being explored by many is
that divorce/custody are common
law and not equity jurisdictions?
This would invalidate many current
practices and allow people to
seek relief under the constitutional
provisions for common law. The
National Association of Court
Watchers is one place for information
on this area.
See
more helpful case law here
2
|
