Ulin v. Polansky (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-028-13)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 11‑P‑1450 Appeals Court JENNIFER H. ULIN vs. SCOTT P. POLANSKY. No. 11‑P‑1450. Middlesex. October 11, 2012. ‑ February 19, 2013. Present: Graham, Vuono, & Hanlon, JJ. Divorce and Separation, Child support, Modification of judgment. Parent and Child, Child support. Evidence, Expert opinion. Witness, Expert. Judgment, Relief from judgment. Practice, Civil, Relief from judgment. Complaint for divorce filed in the Middlesex Division of the Probate and Family Court Department on February 25, 2003. Complaints for modification of judgment, filed on December 1, 2008, and February 27, 2009, were heard by Spencer M. Kagan, J., and a motion for relief from judgment was also heard by him. Philip J. Byers for the wife. Karen W. Stuntz (Geraldine P. McEvoy with her) for the husband. GRAHAM, J. Following the parties’ divorce, the wife filed a complaint for modification seeking an increase in child support payments on the grounds that she had recently become unemployed. A judge of the Probate and Family Court ruled that a modification was warranted but, due to income he attributed to the wife, ordered only a modest increase in the husband’s support obligation. The wife appeals from the modification judgment and from the denial of her later motion for relief from that judgment. 1. Background. The parties were married in 1989; a judgment of divorce nisi entered on December 21, 2006. Two children were born of the marriage, in 1994 and 1996. At the time of divorce, both parents earned approximately $ 150,000 per year. Under the terms of the original judgment, the husband was ordered to pay child support in the amount of about sixty-five dollars per week, both parties were to share equally the costs of a nanny, and both parents were to have about equal parenting time. In 2008, the wife’s employer hired a new supervisor, who informed her that she would be required to meet certain sales growth targets within a specified time. Believing that she could not reasonably meet these new goals, the wife negotiated a severance package for twenty-four weeks of salary. After those payments ran out in November, 2008, she began collecting unemployment benefits. Once she became unemployed, the wife began to actively seek new employment in her field of health care marketing. Notwithstanding her previous experience and education, […]