Mead v. Mead
| Decision Date | 30 May 1974 |
| Citation | 2 Mass.App.Ct. 338,311 N.E.2d 585 |
| Parties | Charles B. MEAD v. Patricia M. MEAD. |
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
Lloyd S. French, Framingham, for libellee.
Chester Darling, Andover, for libellant.
Before HALE, C.J., and KEVILLE and ARMSTRONG, JJ.
The Meads were married for twenty years and have four children ranging in age from fourteen to eighteen. On January 22, 1971 Mr. Mead was granted a decree nisi of divorce on the ground of cruel and abusive treatment. Mrs. Mead was given custody of the children. Incorporated in that decree was an agreement of the parties containing detailed arrangements for the support of Mrs. Mead and the children. This agreement was the result of extended negotiations between the Meads, their lawyers and the probate judge who heard the divorce.
Less than six months later Mr. Mead filed a petition for modification which was allowed, after a hearing, by another judge. The case comes here on the appeal of Mrs. Mead with a report of the evidence but no report of material facts. On an appeal presented to us in this posture all questions of law, fact and discretion are open for our determination. The judge's decree imports a finding of each fact essential to sustain it which is supported by the evidence, and such findings will not be reversed unless plainly wrong. Colbert v. Hennessey, 351 Mass. 131, 134, 217 N.E.2d 914 (1966).
A detailed recitation of the terms of the agreement embodied in the decree nisi and those contained in the modification would serve no useful purpose. In substance, the agreement called for the payment of a weekly sum as alimony for Mrs. Mead and a weekly sum for support for the children. Two trusts were to be established for the education of the children and for the support of Mrs. Mead. These were to be funded by Mr. Mead in the sum of $60,000 from inheritances from the estates of his parents now deceased. There were other provisions for the conveyance of property to Mrs. Mead and for life insurance to protect her and the children. Parenthetically, except for the payment of the weekly sums for alimony and support, Mrs. Mead, prior to the allowance of his petition for modification, had largely failed to honor his obligations under the agreement.
The decree as modified is a radical departure from the terms of the initial decree. It, inter alia, completely abrogates the provisions for the $60,000 in trust funds, the trustees...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kennedy v. Kennedy
...themselves. Balanced against these factors were George's rising income and the effect of inflation on Lillian. See Mead v. Mead, 2 Mass.App. 338, 340, 311 N.E.2d 585 (1974) (where husband's financial position had improved since entry of decree, downward modification unwarranted); Thompson v......
-
Binder v. Binder
...343 Mass. 247, 249, 178 N.E.2d 281, 282 (1961). See also Hinds v. Hinds, 329 Mass. 190, 191, 107 N.E.2d 319 (1952); Mead v. Mead, 2 Mass.App. 338, 340, 311 N.E.2d 585 (1974). To pass on Mrs. Binder's contention, we do not confine ourselves to the facts found by the judge, which were not int......
-
Pemberton v. Pemberton
...343 Mass. 247, 249, 178 N.E.2d 281 (1961). See also Hinds v. Hinds, 329 Mass. 190, 191, 107 N.E.2d 319 (1952); Mead v. Mead, 2 Mass.App. 338, 340, 311 N.E.2d 585 (1974). The rule applies identically whether modification is considered in the context of a proceeding for modification or is sou......
-
Kelley v. Kelley
...living at home, and wife had inherited a substantial sum of money and had a significantly greater income). See Mead v. Mead, 2 Mass.App.Ct. 338, 339-340, 311 N.E.2d 585 (1974) (no change in circumstances to support modification, especially in light of evidence that husband's financial posit......