By Thomas B. Scheffey |The Connecticut Law Tribune
If anyone thought former Supreme Court Justice C. Ian McLachlan was going to slip quietly into obscurity after he stepped down from the high court last summer, they’re mistaken.
Last week, he was heading a band of four prominent family law practitioners who are taking on Connecticut’s 40-year-old alimony statute. And they’re getting some unexpected backlash. The most controversial item is a mathematical formula for calculating spousal alimony.
The legislative proposal is causing a rift in family bar circles, with critics saying that it could impinge on a judge’s discretion. The Family Law Section of the Connecticut Bar Association is also opposing it.
On April 5, McLachlan presented written testimony to the legislative Judiciary Committee. He explained that he formed a “lawyers’ group” with former CBA President Livia Barndollar, Gaetano Ferro and Arthur Balbierer – all prominent matrimonial lawyers — who are concerned that alimony awards by judges are too erratic.
Their proposed formula would take 30 percent of the annual gross income of the spouse with greater income and subtract 20 percent of the other spouse’s income. For example, if a husband made $100,000 (30 percent of which is $30,000) and the wife $50,000 (20 percent of which is $10,000), the annual alimony payment to the woman would be $20,000.
Related: Virtual campaign to veto Florida alimony bill underway
Bill banning Shariah law in Florida family cases passes Senate panel
If you’d like to discuss family law, contact with Kaine Fisher, head of RLG’s Family Law Department, kfisher@roselawgroup.com.
