Richard Fahy v. Thelma Ann Fahy (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This matter came before the court on May 3, 2010, in connection with the plaintiff's Motion to Modify Alimony Post-Judgment filed February 16, 2010 (# 150) and the plaintiff's Request to Amend a prior Motion to Modify dated January 16, 2009, and filed January 20, 2009 (# 146).   The request had attached to it a copy of the prior motion.   The parties appeared with counsel on May 3, 2010, offered their testimony and introduced documentary evidence.

The following information is contained in the file.   The parties were married on June 5, 1960.   On October 6, 1980, the court (Google, J.) dissolved the marriage after a contested trial and issued a Memorandum of Decision.   The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff unallocated alimony and child support in the amount of $24,000 each year until their minor child Mark reached the age of eighteen (born September 22, 1967).   After Mark attained the age of eighteen, the unallocated amount was changed to periodic alimony of $21,600 per year, payable in bi-monthly installments of $900 on the 1st and 15th of each month.

On April 27, 1995, the court (Sullivan, P.J.), following a contested hearing, denied the plaintiff's motion for modification and granted the defendant's motion for modification.   The court increased the defendant's alimony by $110 per week, $5,720 per year.   The alimony order thus totaled $27,320 per year, payable in installments of $1,138.33 per payment on the first and fifteenth of the month.

Both parties testified extensively about their deteriorating health and finances.   In addition to the plaintiff's health claims, his present wife is very ill with cancer.   Neither party presented any evidence to corroborate their medical claims.   In order for the court to modify the orders of the court entered on April 27, 1995, the plaintiff has to prove there has been a substantial change in circumstances since then.

The financial affidavits filed by the parties at the present hearing reported the following information.   The plaintiff's gross income per week was $5,619 with a net of $4,130.   His weekly expenses amounted to $4,578.37, which included a payment to the defendant of $2,000, with an additional payment of $310 towards his liabilities.   His assets amounted to $76,625 and his liabilities amounted to $39,219.   The defendant's income consisted solely of the $2,000 she was receiving from the plaintiff.   She reported her expenses of $2,465.53, assets of $29,343.46 and liabilities of $1,349.44.

The financial affidavits filed by the parties in connection with the April 1995 decision of the court reported the following information.   The plaintiff's gross income per week was $1,442 with a net of $1,046.   His assets amounted to $341,733 and his liabilities amounted to $53,500.   The defendant was employed in a jewelry store earning a weekly gross income of $259 with a net of $177.   Her weekly expenses were $761 with an additional $38 towards liabilities of $11,860.   Her assets amounted to $246,997.

Contrasting the financial situation of 1995 with the present, the court finds that the plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of proving a substantial change and denies his motion for modification.

SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

CARUSO, JTR

Caruso, John R., J.T.R.