Sal and Matilda were married for twenty-seven years at the time ...

[stevenposner]

Sal and Matilda were married for twenty-seven years at the time of their divorce. They were a middle income couple with no minor children at the time of the divorce. Sal was an electrician and Matilda an administrative assistant. They were both represented by counsel and each party claimed to have made full disclosure. Each kept their pension and the marital home was sold and the proceeds were divided equally. Both parties waived any claim to alimony at the time of the divorce or at any future time. They asked that their agreement be incorporated in the divorce judgment and also survive as an independent contract. During the year following the divorce, two events occurred: a) Sal learned that while they were separated but prior to the divorce, Matilda won nearly 500,000 in a state lottery but never revealed that fact to Sal. He learned about it through the grapevine when he couldn't understand how Matilda was able to live so high on the hog as he put it.
 
  b) Sal developed myasthenia gravis and was seriously disabled. He could no longer work and could not yet collect his pension. He was about to be forced onto public assistance. He wanted to file a Complaint for alimony to help avoid that outcome. What recourse does Sal have given these two developments?

Question 2

Which of the following factors must be considered by a court making custody decisions in virtually all states?
 
  A) the child's preference
  B) the custodial parent's sexual preference
  C) parental smoking
  D) a documented history of domestic violence

[chloejackso]

Answer to Question 1

He should file an action to have the court vacate or set aside the judgment and request a new trial. The precise name and nature of the action will depend on the jurisdiction.
He should also seek alimony in the new proceeding or, if necessary, without a new agreement. The court may find that his serious medical condition and Matilda's misconduct constitute a more than substantial change in circumstances warranting an alimony award despite the waiver in the parties' agreement. Because the agreement survived, if the family court does award alimony to Sal, Matilda may seek to enforce the agreement under contract law in a court of equity. However, she would clearly be coming into court with unclean hands

Answer to Question 2

D

[stevenposner]

Excellent

[peter]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it