Informacije

14. dan 14. junij 2011 - Zgodovina

14. dan 14. junij 2011 - Zgodovina


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

9.30 PREDSEDNIK odhaja iz Miamija na Floridi na poti San Juan, Portoriko Miami International Airport

11:45 PREDSEDNIK prispe na San Juan, Portoriko, mednarodno letališče Luis Muñoz Marin

11.55 PREDSEDNIK daje kratke pripombe na pozdravnem dogodku Mednarodno letališče Luis Muñoz Marin

12.55 PREDSEDNIK obišče pokritost bazena La Fortaleza
14:55 PREDSEDNIK intervjuvata El Nuevo Día in Univision of Puerto Rico Caribe Hilton

15:50 PREDSEDNIK se udeleži dogodka DNC Caribe Hilton

16:00 Čas klica na bazen v mestu
16:40 PREDSEDNIK odhaja iz San Juana, Portoriko, mednarodno letališče Luis Muñoz Marin


Najnovejše novice o ponovnih odprtjih templjev

Nadgradnja: Več templjev še naprej povečuje aktivnost, ko se omejitve COVID-19 končajo na različnih področjih. 21. junija se je v 16. fazi začelo še 16 templjev. 5. julija se bodo v 2.-B fazi znova odprli štirje templji, 1. stopnja pa v Kijevskem Ukrajinskem templju.

Od maja 2020 se templji Cerkve Jezusa Kristusa svetih iz poslednjih dni odpirajo previdno, previdno, v štirih fazah in na podlagi lokalnih okoliščin in vladnih omejitev, povezanih s pandemijo COVID-19.

Templji v prvih štirih fazah delujejo omejeno. V skladu s krajevnimi okoliščinami in vladnimi predpisi bodo za tempeljske delavce in zavetnike veljali ključni varnostni ukrepi, ki lahko vključujejo maske, zmanjšano število obiskovalcev v templju hkrati, manj osebja v templju, sanacijo po tempeljskih obredih, socialno distanciranje in razporeditev sedežev. , ter preverjanje temperature na vhodu.

Pet faz odpiranja zmanjšuje tveganje, ustreza povpraševanju in zmogljivosti templja ter upošteva zdravstvene omejitve v tempeljskem okrožju.

Fazne vsote od 28. junija 2021

  • Faza 1: 3
  • 2. faza: 13
  • Faza 2-B: 19
  • 3. faza: 117
  • Faza 4: 0
  • Začasno ustavljeno: 8
  • Za prenovo zaprto: 8

Faza 1: Živa tesnjenja moža in žene po dogovoru

Faza 2: Odprto za vse žive uredbe le z omejitvami

Faza 2-B: Odprto za vse žive obrede in krste za umrle posameznike z omejitvami

5. julija 2021 bodo templji na naslednjih štirih lokacijah začeli Fazo 2-B. Člani v vsakem tempeljskem okrožju bodo obveščeni po e -pošti, ko bodo lahko rezervirali svoj tempelj na spletu. Opomba: Spletni sistem razporejanja za vsak tempelj bo aktiviran v torek ob 10. uri po hribovskem času teden dni pred predvidenim datumom začetka.

  • Mexico City, Mehika
  • Pariz, Francija
  • Haag, Nizozemska
  • Vancouver, Britanska Kolumbija

Faza 3: Odprto za vse odloke z omejitvami

Naslednjih 16 templjev je bilo 21. junija ponovno odprtih v tretji fazi. Člani v tempeljskih okrožjih za druge templje, ki se bodo junija in julija preselili v tretjo fazo, bodo po e -pošti obveščeni, ko bodo lahko rezervirali svoj tempelj na spletu.

  • Tempelj Billings Montana
  • Tempelj Boise Idaho
  • Tempelj Fresno California
  • Tempelj Idaho Falls Idaho Falls
  • Tempelj Manti Utah
  • Tempelj Meridian Idaho
  • Tempelj Monticello Utah
  • Tempelj Mount Timpanogos Utah
  • Newport Beach v Kaliforniji
  • Tempelj Oakland California
  • Tempelj Payson v Utahu
  • Tempelj Redlands California
  • Rexburški tempelj v Idahu
  • Tempelj Sacramento California
  • Tempelj San Diego California
  • Tempelj Vernal Utah

4. faza: Odprto za polno delovanje

Zaustavljene operacije

Tempelji na naslednjih lokacijah so zaradi lokalnih omejitev glede COVID-19 ustavili delovanje.


Zakaj Bugler Boy Gillies?

Poleg geografske povezave - četa 600B se vsak ponedeljek zvečer sestane v prezbiterijanski cerkvi Oak Ridge, tik ob gozdu, kjer je bil ubit Gillies - Matzinger pravi, da Gillijeva zgodba odmeva v njegovih skavtih, ker je Gillies umrl tako mlad.

"Ko se skavti vidijo na časovnici zgodovine, razumejo, da imajo aktivno vlogo, ki temelji na dejanjih drugih, ki so prišli pred njimi," pravi Matzinger. "Bugler Boy Gillies bi lahko bil skavt, če bi program takrat obstajal, in bil bi nekdo, za katerega bi odmevali skavtski ideali."

Medtem ko so bili številni vojaki v revolucionarni vojni sirote ali pa so v njihovih enotah služili starejši sorodniki, se je za nalogo prostovoljno oglasil Bugler Boy Gillies. Starše je imel doma v Pensilvaniji.

To je zgodba, ki je resnično zadela Ethana Hartmana, 17-letnega Eagle Scout v Troop 600B.

"Razmišljam o tem, kako bi lahko nekdo tako mlad naredil toliko," pravi Ethan. "Zaradi tega želim narediti več, da pomagam v svoji skupnosti, tako kot on."

Kot višji vodja patrulje Ethan prevzame odgovornost za vodenje praznovanja življenja Bugler Boy Gillies.

"Moram voditi svoje skavte v spomin na Gillies," pravi Ethan. "Pomembno se ga je spomniti, saj kaže, da lahko vsakdo naredi nekaj drugega."

Kar se tiče vloge skavta Matzingerja med slovesnostjo štirikrat na leto, najraje ostane zunaj slike.

"Stojim v ozadju z drugo registrirano odraslo osebo, da skavti ostanejo varni in da so na voljo starejšemu patruljnemu vodji, če od mene kaj zahteva," pravi Matzinger. "To je dogodek, ki ga načrtuje tabornik, ki ga vodi tabornik in ga izvaja."


Moja prva opomba od Cliftona

Poslalo wmfinck v Ned, 07/29/2018 - 13:01

To je prva nota, ki sem jo dobil od Clifton Emahiserja. Cenil sem njegovo spodbudo, zato sem jo olupil iz članka, ki mi ga je poslal, in ga zalepil pred Sveto pismo, ki sem ga uporabljal ves čas v zaporu. Še danes ga imam. Malo sem vedel, kaj bi se lahko zgodilo z mojim prvim stikom z njim in njegovim dojemljivim in skromnim odnosom, ko sem pisal. Kar me je pri Cliftonu vedno najbolj navdušilo, je bila njegova neverjetna ponižnost, kljub vsemu učenju.


Brata Reno izvedeta prvi rop vlaka v zgodovini ZDA

6. oktobra 1866 sta brata John in Simeon Reno uprizorila prvi rop vlaka v ameriški zgodovini in s 13.000 dolarji odletela z železniškega vlaka v Ohiu in Mississippiju v okrožju Jackson v Indiani.

Seveda so bili vlaki oropani pred zadrževanjem bratov Reno ’. Toda vsi ti prejšnji zločini so bili vsi vlomi mirujočih vlakov, ki so sedeli v skladiščih ali tovornih postajah. Prispevek bratov Reno k kriminalni zgodovini je bil ustaviti premikajoči se vlak v redko poseljeni regiji, kjer bi lahko izvajali svoj zločin, ne da bi tvegali vmešavanje zakona ali radovednih navzočih.

Čeprav je nastala v Indiani, je nova metoda ropanja vlakov brata Reno hitro postala zelo priljubljena na zahodu. Mnogi razbojniki, ki bi sicer ropali banke ali diližanse, so odkrili, da so novozgrajene transkontinentalne in regionalne železnice na zahodu privlačne tarče. Z razcvetom zahodnega gospodarstva so vlaki pogosto prevažali velike količine denarja in dragocenih mineralov. Široko odprti prostori Zahoda so roparjem vlakov zagotovili tudi veliko izoliranih območij, idealnih za ustavitev vlakov, in veliko divjih prostorov, kjer se lahko skrijejo pred zakonom. Nekatere kriminalne tolpe, na primer Butch Cassidy's Wild Bunch, so ugotovile, da je bilo ropanje vlakov tako enostavno in donosno, da so za nekaj časa postale njihova kriminalna posebnost.

Lastniki železnic pa niso nameravali sedeti in pustiti Cassidyju ali kateremu drugemu razbojniku prosto oropati njihove vlake. Na njihovo žalost so bodoči roparji vlakov vse pogosteje ugotavljali, da so gotovina in plemenite kovine na vlakih dobro zaščiteni v ogromnih sefih, ki jih nadzirajo močno oboroženi stražarji. Nekatere železnice, na primer Union Pacific, so celo začele dodajati posebne vagone, namenjene prevozu stražarjev in njihovih konj. V primeru poskusa ropa ti moški niso mogli le zaščititi vlakovnih dragocenosti, temveč so lahko tudi hitro jahali konje in preganjali begunce, ki so bežali, in upali, da bodo trajno končali svojo kriminalno kariero. Zaradi tega je do konca 19. stoletja rop vlakov postajal vse težji in#x2014in nevarnejši — poklic.


SPODBUJANJE IZDELKOV FILIPINO 147

Napolnjen z njegovim Duhom

O, koliko ljudi si drzne začeti dan, ne da bi jim skodelice napolnil Sveti Duh.

Sveti Duh daje moč nad grehom in skušnjavami, pomaga nam premagati slabosti mesa, ščiti pred sovražniki in sovražniki naše duše. Vodi nas po pravičnih poteh zaradi svojega imena in#8217. Poskrbi za vse naše potrebe. Njegova navzočnost zagotavlja, da Gospod obvladuje vsako situacijo, s katero se lahko kdaj soočimo, in da nas ne smejo prevzeti strah ali obup. Ni se nam treba počutiti preobremenjene ali brezupne. Ne smemo biti depresivni, saj boj pripada Gospodu in On se bo boril za nas. in nas vodi naprej.

Spodbujam vas, da prosite Gospoda, da vas napolni danes in vsak dan, tudi ko začnete dan ali karkoli že ste na življenjski poti. Brez njega niste doživeli njegovega polnega blagoslova. Hvalimo Boga, ki je naš tolažnik in moli za nas v neznanih jezikih, kadar ne moremo moliti niti zase. Slava Jezusovemu imenu!

Dejanja 1: 8
"Toda moč boste prejeli, ko bo Sveti Duh prišel na vas, in boste moje priče v Jeruzalemu in po vsej Judeji in Samariji in do konca zemlje."

Luka 11:13
"Če torej vi, ki ste zli, znate dajati dobra darila svojim otrokom, koliko več bo nebeški Oče dal Svetega Duha tistim, ki ga prosijo!"

1. Korinčanom 6:19
Ali pa ne veste, da je vaše telo tempelj Svetega Duha v vas, ki ga imate od Boga? Nisi svoj.

Galačanom 5:22
Toda sad Duha je ljubezen, veselje, mir, potrpežljivost, prijaznost, dobrota, zvestoba.

Rimljanom 15:13
Naj vas Bog upanja napolni z vsem veseljem in mirom pri verovanju, da boste z močjo Svetega Duha preplavili upanje.

Rimljanom 8:26
Podobno nam Duh pomaga pri naši šibkosti. Kajti ne vemo, za kaj bi morali moliti, kot bi morali, toda sam Duh posreduje pri nas z globokimi stoki za besede.

Ocenite to:


C.D.L. proti M.M.L.

Ločitev in ločitev, preživnina, preživnina za otroke. Starši in otrok, preživnina za otroke.

V okoliščinah odločbe o preživnini v postopku za razvezo zakonske zveze je bil razpon dohodka, ki ga je sodnik pripisal možu, razumen in podkrepljen z ugotovitvami in zapisniki s sojenja, zlasti kadar je mož, ki je bil prostovoljno brezposeln, zaslužil manj, kot bi lahko z razumnimi napori in kadar je imel mož zgodovinsko sposobnost zaslužiti plačo na ravni, ki je skoraj štirikrat višja od pripisanega dohodka [152-157], mož ni dokazal, da je sodnik zanemaril obravnavo potencialnih trgov dela in razpoložljivih delovnih mest možu v starosti in specializiranih izkušnjah, ki bi ustvarile raven dohodka, ki se pripisuje možu [157-158].

Sodnik v postopku za razvezo zakonske zveze ni naredil napake, saj je ženin dohodek od naložb izključil iz ugotovitve njene potrebe po preživnini, saj bi tak izračun privedel do nepravičnega rezultata, ko bi žena namesto preživnine od moža enostransko zahtevati, da zadovolji njene potrebe in življenjske stroške iz prihodkov od naložb iz sredstev, ki so ji bila dodeljena v okviru delitve premoženja, medtem ko je imel mož zmožnost zaslužiti dohodek, ki zadošča za potrebe obeh strank, ne da bi uporabil lastne prihodke od naložb. [158-161]

To sodišče je zadevo vrnilo zapuščinskemu in družinskemu sodišču, da bi ugotovilo, ali je sodnikova odločba o preživnini ženi nepravilno vključevala nekatere stroške, povezane z otroki, in če je tako, za prilagoditev odredb o preživnini in preživnini za otroke. [161-163]

V postopku za razvezo zakonske zveze je bila sodnikova ženina upravičena do odvetniških honorarjev in dosojen znesek je bil razumen, saj mož ni imel razumne podlage, da bi zavrnil niti razpravo o kakršni koli ponudbi za preživnino in preživnino za otroka, in glede na mož se je odločil za dolgotrajno sojenje o teh vprašanjih. [163]

Pritožba zaradi razveze zakonske zveze, vložena v oddelek za zapuščinsko in družinsko sodišče v Bristolu 26. marca 2001.

Primer je obravnaval Randy J. Kaplan, J.

H. Reed Witherby za moža.

W. Sanford Durland, III, za ženo.

BERRY, J. Ker je tožeči stranki (možu) naložilo plačilo preživnine toženi stranki (ženi) v višini 711,54 USD na teden, je sodnik zapuščinskega in družinskega sodišča možu pripisal dohodek. Mož je bil prej partner v veliki odvetniški pisarni v Washingtonu, vendar je do ločitvenega postopka odstopil od družbe, ni več opravljal odvetniške dejavnosti in je bil brezposeln. Sodnik je možu pripisal dohodek v znesku, ki zadošča za potrebe vsake od strank po "zmanjšanju". Poleg tega je sodnik pri ugotavljanju finančne potrebe žene po podpori zavrnil prilagoditev moževih preživninskih obveznosti za obračun prihodkov od naložb, ki bi jih žena lahko izvirala iz sredstev, dodeljenih ji v G. L. c. 208, odstavek 34, delitev premoženja.

Mož izpodbija tako znesek dohodka, ki mu je bil implicitno pripisan, kot tudi to, da sodnik ni upošteval ženinih prihodkov od naložb pri določanju njene potrebe po podpori. Trdi tudi, da se je sodnik zmotil, ko je pri odločitvi o plačilu preživnine neupravičeno upošteval nekatere stroške preživnine. Čeprav ne želimo motiti sodnikovih ugotovitev o pripisovanju dohodka možu in sodnikove odločitve, da se ne opira na ženine prihodke od naložb, zadevo vrnemo na zapuščinsko in družinsko sodišče, da bo sodnik lahko ugotovil, ali preživnina in Zneske preživnine je treba prilagoditi, ker sodišče očitno upošteva stroške, povezane z otroki, pri oblikovanju preživnine.

1. Postopkovno in dejansko ozadje. Iz sodnikovih ugotovitev jemljemo naslednje dejansko ozadje, ki ga po potrebi dopolnjujejo pričevanja na sojenju. Ker so neposredno povezane z utemeljitvijo sodnikovega pripisovanja dohodka možu, poleg dejstev v zvezi s poroko na splošno, smo podali tudi podrobne podrobnosti v zvezi z moževo pravno prakso, položaji, ki jih je imel, in nadomestilom, ki jih je imel mož zaslužil kot odvetnik.

Stranki sta se poročila junija 1973, ločila pa sta se 26. decembra 2000. V zakonu so bili trije otroci. [Opomba 1] V prvih letih zakona je žena delala kot

šolski učitelj, medtem ko je mož končal pravno šolo. Ob rojstvu najstarejšega otroka v strankah leta 1979 je žena prenehala z delom in se posvetila varstvu otrok in domačim dejavnostim.

Kar se tiče moževega dela, se je mož po diplomi na pravni fakulteti pri vrhu svojega razreda in po uradniških dolžnostih pri pritožbenem sodišču Združenih držav in vrhovnem sodišču Združenih držav lotil tega, kar bi postalo izjemno donosna praksa zasebnega prava v področje energetskega prava. Leta 1983 je mož postal partner v odvetniški pisarni v Washingtonu, kjer se je specializiral za zvezno ureditev plinskih in električnih podjetij. Leta 1995 se je stransko preselil v Washington, DC, pisarno velike odvetniške družbe Wall Street, da bi postal vodja oddelka za energijo. Od leta 1990 do 1995 je bil povprečni možni zaslužek približno 700.000 USD na leto. Med letoma 1996 in 2000 so se njegovi letni zaslužki gibali od 500.771 do 658.241 dolarjev. V zadnjem celem letu prakse v podjetju Wall Street je bila možina najvišja obračunska stopnja 540 USD na uro.

Sredi do konca osemdesetih let so bile stranke v finančnem položaju, da so uživale v življenjskem slogu, sorazmernem z moževim poklicnim uspehom. Kupili so zelo veliko hišo v Potomacu v Marylandu in najeli celoletno pomoč pri vzdrževanju gospodinjstva in dvorišča. Finančno so si lahko privoščili letne počitnice, se pridružili klubom in pogosto večerjali. Ko so otroci odraščali, so stranke kupile avtomobile za vsakega otroka in so lahko v celoti plačale stroške zasebne šole in fakultete svojih otrok.

Nekje sredi ali konec devetdesetih let sta se stranki začeli pogovarjati o "zmanjšanju" svojega življenjskega sloga v prihodnosti. Glede na dolge ure, pogosta potovanja v tujino in stres njegove odvetniške prakse - za katero sta se stranki strinjali, da je moža prizadela in ustvarila napetost v družini - je bila glavna sestavina načrta za zmanjšanje števila zaposlenih to, da bo v prihodnosti mož bo čez čas zapustil veliko odvetniško pisarno in se preselil v manj stresen položaj. Stranke so domnevale, da bo možev novi položaj prinesel manj bogato odškodnino kot njegova velika odvetniška pisarna. Načrt pa je bil, da bo mož zaslužil

zadosten dohodek in k njegovemu dohodku bi se dodal dohodek, ki bi ga žena vrnila na delo kot učiteljica. Pogodbenici sta predvidevali, da bodo njuni skupni dohodki prinesli zadostne prihodke za preživljanje družine.

Sodnik je ugotovil, da ni soglasja in da sta se stranki razlikovali glede tega, kdaj bo mož zapustil odvetniško pisarno, kakšna naj bi bila njegova zaposlitev in koliko denarja bi mož želel zaslužiti v kateri koli novi prizadevanje. Žena je pričala, da je razumela, da se mož ne bo spremenil v karieri, dokler se stranki medsebojno ne dogovorita o načrtu, in da je od nje pričakovala, da bo mož zaslužil med 200.000 in 250.000 USD letno. V nasprotju s tem je mož pričal, da naj bi načrt zmanjšanja življenjskih stroškov strank znižal na med 100.000 in 110.000 USD na leto. To vprašanje v času ločitve strank ni bilo rešeno.

Poleg moževega delovnega položaja je načrt zmanjšanja obsegal tudi spremembo prebivališča. Stranki sta razpravljali o selitvi z območja Washingtona, DC v Novo Anglijo. To se je zgodilo. Junija 1999 sta stranki kupili dom v South Dartmouthu in se tja preselili poleti 2000. V prvih mesecih po selitvi in ​​prodaji hiše v Potomacu v Marylandu je mož vzdrževal stanovanje v Washingtonu, DC , od koder se je odpravil na delo in ob vikendih odpotoval v rezidenco South Dartmouth. Med strankama pa je prišlo do nesoglasij in stalnih nesoglasij. 26. decembra 2000 je mož zapustil South Dartmouth in se ni vrnil. To je pomenilo začetek končne ločitve strank, čeprav nekaj časa stranki nista priznali dokončnosti delitve. [Opomba 2]

Nekaj ​​dni kasneje, 3. januarja 2001, je mož brez odpovedi in razprave z ženo odvetniški družbi dal odstop od partnerstva. Mož je pričal, da sta se stranki predhodno odločili, da bo zapustil svoje podjetje najkasneje januarja 2001. Sodnik je ugotovil nasprotno in ugotovil, da v zvezi s tem med možem in ženo ni bilo srečanj in da natančna točka odhoda ni bila opredeljena.

Sredi januarja 2001 stranke niso imele dohodka in so živele od svojega premoženja. Konec decembra 2001 sta si stranki razdelili določene račune, s katerimi sta plačevali življenjske stroške, mož pa je vsaj del denarja porabil za nakup stanovanja na območju Washingtona, DC. Pozneje, v letih 2001-2002, se je žena, ki je svoje znanje nadgradila z več tečaji specialnega izobraževanja, vrnila v učilnico s krajšim delovnim časom. Septembra 2002 je začela s polnim delovnim časom kot defektologinja, v času sojenja septembra 2003 pa je letno zaslužila 54.500 USD.

Od januarja 2001, ko je odstopil iz odvetniške pisarne, je mož ostal v Washingtonu, kjer je po sodnikovih ugotovitvah naredil le "minimalne poskuse" pri zaposlitvi. Mož se je (neuspešno) prijavil za delovna mesta na področjih, na katerih, kot je ugotovil sodnik, nima izkušenj in ki nosijo letne odškodnine med 45.000 in 60.000 USD za pravne položaje in 75.000 USD za položaj izvršnega direktorja neprofitne agencije. Ni poskušal opraviti pogovora z nobeno odvetniško družbo.

2. Dogovor in dogovor. Maja 2003 sta stranki sklenili obsežno določbo in delni sporazum, ki je rešil številna vprašanja, vključno z delitvijo stvarnega in osebnega premoženja strank ter računom moževe odvetniške družbe. V skladu s pogoji sporazuma, po katerem sta stranki izenačili delitev svojega premoženja, je morala vsaka stran od predvidene prodaje hiše v South Dartmouthu prejeti približno 636.982 USD, 640.000 USD na račune z odloženim davkom in 830.000 USD na račune z odloženim davkom. Vsaka stran se je poleg tega dogovorila, da bo znesek 145.000 USD iz svojega premoženja prispevala na izobraževalne račune za srednjega in najmlajšega otroka (kar je po mnenju sodnika zadostovalo za kritje preostalih stroškov izobraževanja otrok). Dogovor in delni dogovor strank sta bila vključena, vendar nista združena (razen v zadevah, povezanih z otroki) v sodbi o razvezi zakonske zveze nisi. Vprašanja preživnine in preživnine za otroka so bila izpodbijana in predmet sojenja.

3. Sojenje in odredbe o preživnini in preživnini. Po sedemdnevnem sojenju je sodnik vnesel izčrpne ugotovitve in sodbo, ki možu nalaga plačilo preživnine

žena v višini 711,54 USD na teden od 1. januarja 2002 in preživnina za otroka v korist najmlajšega otroka v višini 87 USD na teden, ki se začne, ko je srednji otrok končal fakulteto in traja do najmlajšega otroka končal fakulteto ali dopolnil triindvajset let, kar se je zgodilo prej.

Glede na to, da mož tri leta pred razvezo zakonske zveze ni delal in ni imel zasluženega dohodka, so bile sodnikove ugotovitve in odredbe v zvezi z preživnino in preživnino otroka nujno odvisne od analize, ki je vključevala pripisovanje dohodek možu. [Opomba 3] Dodelitev preživnine in dodelitev dohodka možu v zvezi s to preživnino sta osrednji del pritožbe moža. Treba je opozoriti, da mož v tej pritožbi ne izpodbija sodnikove odločitve, da mu pripiše nekaj dohodka. Namesto tega se zdi, da je mož trdil, da bi morala biti dodelitev omejena na 75.000 dolarjev (znesek, ki ga je mož ponudil, da bi določil na sojenju), in da bi bilo treba ustrezno znižati plačilo preživnine, da bi ustrezalo tem znesku 75.000 dolarjev. Kot bo razloženo spodaj, sklepamo, da je ta predlagana številka prenizka, in se strinjamo s sodnikom, da možin pripisan dohodek ne sme biti omejen na 75.000 USD. Pri izpodbijanju pripisovanja dohodka mož trdi, da je bila sodnikova analiza napačna, ker tako zatrjuje mož, njegove možnosti za prihodnjo zaposlitev niso bile zelo dobre, ne bi zaslužil veliko denarja in sodnik ni upošteval manjše zaposlitve pri pripisovanju dohodka.

Pri obravnavi vprašanj, predstavljenih v pritožbi, smo se najprej lotili

naprej sodnikove odločitve glede preživnine in preživnine za otroke, nato pa se preusmerijo na analizo pripisanih dohodkov in vprašanje trga dela.

4. Izpodbijana določitev preživnine. Zneski za preživnino in preživnino za ženo so temeljili na sodnikovem izračunu ženinih stroškov:

"Ženine potrebe po najnovejšem finančnem izkazu znašajo 2225 USD na teden ali 115.700 USD [na leto] ... Predvideva, da se bodo njeni tedenski hipotekarni stroški za dom, primerljive vrednosti z možem, zmanjšali na 578,00 USD. bo zmanjšala svoje stroške zase in [najmlajšega otroka] na 97.136 USD [na leto], kar je nekoliko manj od trenutnih stroškov Moža. "

Od tega letnega zneska za ženo v višini 97 136 dolarjev je sodnik odštel približno 50 000 dolarjev, kar odraža letni dohodek žene od vrnitve na delovno silo kot učitelj. Skratka, skupne letne obveznosti preživljanja moža do žene (brez nekaterih manjših različnih stroškov) so bile 41.524 USD: 37.000 USD preživnine (711,54 USD tedensko) in 4.524 USD preživnine (87 USD tedensko). [Opomba 4]

Ko je izračunal preživninske potrebe žene, je sodnik ugotovil, da je pripisovanje dohodka možu za kritje te preživnine in preživnine razumno in upravičeno. Nato se obrnemo na vprašanje dodeljenega dohodka.

5. Pripis dohodka. V ustreznih okoliščinah "[a] sodnik pri pripisovanju dohodka ni omejen na dejanski zaslužek stranke, ampak lahko ... upošteva potencialno sposobnost zaslužka". Heins proti Ledisu, 422. maša 477, 485 (1996). Pripis dohodka je še posebej primeren, kadar sodnik ugotovi, da stranka (najpogosteje primarni zaslužek in ponudnik podpore) prostovoljno zasluži manj, kot je sposobna zaslužiti z razumnimi napori. Kelley proti Kelleyju, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 733, 741 (2005). Podobno je "[a] porazdelitev dohodka lahko primerna, če sodnik ugotovi, da je sprememba poklica prostovoljna."

Flaherty proti Flahertyju, 40 Mass. App. Ct. 289, 291 (1996). V tem primeru sta bila prisotna oba dejavnika, ki upravičujeta pripis dohodka možu. Glej na splošno Schuler proti Schulerju, 382 Mass. 366, 374 (1981) Canning proti Juskalian, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 202, 206 (1992) ("[P]) v sodni praksi upošteva načelo, da se lahko pri določanju nalogov za preživnino [in preživnino] upošteva sposobnost zaslužka starša [ali zakonca] in ne dejanski dohodek") [Opomba 5 ] Cooper proti Cooperju, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 51, 53 (1997).

Sodnik se je pri obravnavi vprašanja dodeljenega dohodka za kritje moževih preživnin in preživnin temeljito preučil finančnega položaja strank, letnih izdatkov in zmožnosti zaslužka ter ugotovil, zakaj je pripisovanje dohodka mož je bil v redu. Ustrezno ugotovitve in analiza sodnega sodnika, za katere ugotavljamo, da so glede na dodelitev dohodka precej niansirane, določajo naslednje:

"Sodišče ugotavlja, da so stroški žene in izdatki za [najmlajšega otroka] blizu zneska, ki ga je mož pričal, da bo družina potrebovala v svojem novem [zmanjšanem] življenjskem slogu. Pregled finančnega izkaza moža tudi kaže, da ima stroške zase in za [srednjega otroka] v istem razponu. [Opomba 6] Sodišče ugotavlja, da mož pričakuje življenjski slog

z neto stroški približno 100.000 USD na leto. Zahteva žene po višini preživnine za vzdrževanje podobnega življenjskega sloga zase in [najmlajšega otroka] je primerna. Žena teh stroškov ne more pokriti samo s svojimi prihodki. Mož ni naredil nobenega koraka, da bi zmanjšal njegov pričakovani življenjski slog, zato Sodišče ne bo zmanjšalo načina življenja žene. Sodišče ugotavlja, kot je podrobneje opisano spodaj, da ima mož zmožen zaslužiti zadosten dohodek, da ima ta način življenja zase in prispeva k življenjskemu slogu žene, da bo primerljiv s tem, o čemer sta se stranki pogovarjali [v zvezi do zmanjšanja števila zaposlenih].

"Sodišče ugotavlja, da ima mož možnost zaslužiti dohodek [za potrebe žene in najmlajšega otroka] ... Sodišče lahko pripiše dohodek možu, če se ugotovi, da zasluži manj Sodišče je pri pripisovanju dohodka možu upoštevalo njegovo izobrazbo, usposabljanje, zgodovino zaposlitve in dogovor strank o zmanjšanju njihovega življenjskega sloga. "

Na začetku in z velikim zanašanjem na Flaherty proti Flahertyju, 40 Mass. App. Ct. 289 (1996), mož trdi, da je sodnik o dodeljenem dohodku sprejel neustrezne ugotovitve. Ne strinjamo se. Zgoraj navedene ugotovitve ter preostali del sodnikovih podrobnih ugotovitev in analiz, ki podpirajo pripisovanje, izpodbijajo to trditev. V nasprotju z moževimi primerjavami ta primer ne predstavlja vrst pomanjkljivosti, ki so bile predstavljene v Flahertyju, kjer je prišlo do velike opustitve sodnih ugotovitev v podporo pripisovanju dohodka, evidenčni dokazi pa tega ne pripisujejo. Tako je v

Flaherty, smo ponovno potrdili načelo, da je mogoče pripisati dohodek, vendar smo sodbo razveljavili, ker sodnik v tem primeru ni potrdil "nobenih posebnih ugotovitev", da "ni dokazov, da je bila sprememba [moža] v delovnem statusu prostovoljno "in obstajali so izravnalni dokazi, da si je mož" razumno prizadeval zagotoviti dodaten dohodek ". Id. na 291. Teh napak v obravnavanem primeru ni.

Kot je bilo že omenjeno, mož meni, da bi moral biti pripisani dohodek omejen na znesek 75.000 USD, kolikor je mož določil na sojenju. Mož zatrjuje, da je sodnica zavrnila sprejetje te številke in da ni navedla določenega zneska za pripisani dohodek.

Daleč boljša praksa je, da sodnik pri pripisovanju dohodka stranki za preživnino (ali preživnino za otroka) določi znesek ali opredeli razumno omejen obseg dohodka, ki ga je treba pripisati. Taka specifikacija določa gospodarske točke za stranke, služi kot označevalec, če bi stranka pozneje želela spremeniti plačilo preživnine, in zagotavlja merilo, ki je bilo upoštevano v obrazložitvi sodnika in ugotovitvah, ki bodo olajšale revizijo pritožbe. Dokler pa sodnik naredi ugotovitve, ki zagotavljajo dokazno podporo in določajo temeljno utemeljitev pripisa, in finančno analizo, iz katere je mogoče izračunati obseg pripisanega dohodka, sodnik ni določil določena vsota za pripisani dohodek sama po sebi ne prinaša napak, da bi zahtevala razveljavitev. Prvič, "[e] stimulacija je neločljivo povezana s pripisovanjem prihodnjih zaslužkov." Konzerviranje, 33 Mass. App. Ct. na 211. Poleg tega lahko obstajajo primeri, kot je ta, ki ovirajo vrsto matematične natančnosti, za katero se mož zagovarja v pritožbenem izpodbijanju sodnikovih ugotovitev. Veliko težje je z vsoto količinsko opredeliti določene potencialne prihodnje prihodke, v takem primeru, ko ni obstoječe dohodkovne osnove, ker mož pred sojenjem po prostovoljnem odstopu od partnerstva ni delal že nekaj let. odvetniške pisarne januarja 2001. Tako se je moral sodnik spopasti z ničelno letno osnovo dohodka in ni imel ničesar ekstrapolirati v zvezi z dodelitvijo dohodka. [Opomba 7]

Glede na težave, predstavljene v tem konkretnem primeru, ne glede na to, da ni bila navedena določena vsota, sodnikove ugotovitve, analiza finančnega položaja strank in metodologija za pripis dohodka zagotavljajo merljiv razpon za dohodek, ki je bil pripisan možu. Natančneje, ugotovitve in metodologija so bile usmerjene v določitev ustreznih letnih izdatkov vsake od strank (s prilagoditvami zaslužka žene od njene vrnitve k poučevanju) in v pripis takšnih prihodkov, ki bi bili potrebni za kritje teh stroškov. Sodnik je ugotovil, da so letni stroški moža in žene v razponu približno 100.000 USD. But, as to the husband's living expenses, the judge further found that "[t]he Husband has taken no steps to diminish his anticipated lifestyle," and that an attribution was in order so as not to "diminish the Wife's lifestyle," and to equalize the parties' lifestyles. From the combined annual expenses of $200,000, the judge subtracted the wife's approximately $50,000 in teaching income. This yields an attributed pre-tax income in the order of about $150,000, and with tax adjustments, the income attributed to the husband would most probably fall in the range of $170,000-$175,000. [Note 8] In relation to what the judge sought to achieve in terms of equal lifestyles for the husband and the wife based on

the corresponding equal annual expenses of both, and with consideration of the parties' disproportionate potential future earning capacities, the judge expressly found "that the Husband has the ability to earn sufficient income for him to have this lifestyle for himself and contribute to the Wife's lifestyle."

In light of all of the foregoing, and giving special weight to the judge's finding that the husband was "earning less than he could with reasonable efforts," see Kelley, 64 Mass. App. Ct. at 741, and especially in light of the husband's historical capacity to earn at a level close to four times the attributed income, we conclude that the range of attributed income to the husband by the judge with respect to alimony was reasonable and supported by the findings and the trial record.

6. Potential jobs and markets for the husband. In further contesting the attribution of income, the husband argues that the judge failed to address potential job markets and positions that would be available to someone of the husband's age and specialized experience at the level of income attributed to the husband.

We discern no error. The judge considered these issues and made such findings as were necessary, all of which are supported by the evidence. In her findings, the judge considered employment prospects and potential income commensurate with the husband's education, training, and employment history, including his past earnings. Reduced to essentials, the judge found that the husband has an ability to obtain employment in several fields, including the law, which would yield sufficient income. The judge was not required to point to a specific position or job opening. Prim. Bassette v. Bartolucci, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 732 , 734-735 (1995).

To illustrate: the judge considered the employment market in Washington, D.C., where the husband had purchased a home

and in which the judge found the husband might put his longstanding and accomplished skills to work at a quite good salary. Pertinent to a potential job placement in that market, the judge found that the husband's own testimony and that of his expert, Ronald Cullis, "only enforced the Court's position that the Husband has substantial skills in law and in other areas." [Note 9] Of further weight on these issues is the judge's finding that the husband has failed to take reasonable steps even to test, for example, the legal or corporate job markets during the three years following his resignation from his firm. [Note 10] Indeed, the judge noted that the husband to date had only applied for jobs in areas for which he had little or no experience. [Note 11], [Note 12]

7. Investment income. The husband argues that the judge committed error by excluding the wife's investment income from the

determination of her need for alimony. According to the husband, the wife can generate a stream of investment income from the assets allocated to her in the divorce. This investment income, when coupled with the wife's teaching salary, the husband argues, should be applied as a supplement to meet the wife's annual financial needs and correspondingly reduce the husband's alimony obligation.

"The focus of any financial award must include 'the crucial issue in an alimony dispute, namely, the [spouse's] need for support . . . in relationship to the respective financial circumstances of the parties' " (emphasis added). Grubert v. Grubert, 20 Mass. App. Ct. 811 , 819 (1985), quoting from Partridge v. Partridge, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 918 , 919 (1982). An award of alimony may be appropriate, even if the receiving spouse can generate income from the estate awarded her by the divorce, because "[m]any considerations shape the structure of an award." Johnston v. Johnston, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 531 , 537 (1995). See Rosenberg v. Rosenberg, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 903 , 904 (1992). Cf. Moriarty v. Stone, 41 Mass. App. Ct. 151 , 159 (1996).

In declining to "factor in" the wife's investment income from her assets to meet the wife's financial needs, the judge quite clearly and directly considered the alimony calculation in relationship to the respective financial circumstances of the parties. See Johnston, 38 Mass. App. Ct. at 537. In these respects, the judge found that the equal division of assets, which was a part of the stipulation and agreement between the parties (see part 2, supra) did not, in ultimate effect, put the wife in anywhere near an "equal" financial position with the husband, given the extraordinarily great differential in their earning capacities. Continuing, the judge found that by mutual agreement of the parties, the wife, at age fifty-three, had not over the past decades developed an increasing earning capacity, but rather had just rejoined the workforce after a twenty-year absence, and "will never have the ability to earn anywhere near the income level of the Husband." Therefore, the judge determined that the husband should be a contributor to her economic needs by alimony payments calculated without a reduction on account of the assets allocated to the wife. In addition to the just quoted finding, other salient findings on this issue state as follows:

"The Court finds that the Wife should not have to rely on her assets received as her share of the divorce settlement to maintain her standard of living. The Husband is 53 years of age and the Court does not support his position that he can choose to remain unemployed or underemployed to the detriment of the Wife in this long term marriage.

"Both parties received substantially the same assets in the division of property and the Court does not attribute income to either party from these assets to maintain their current lifestyle. There was no testimony that the parties intended to rely on their assets during their downshift to meet their expenses. An equal division of assets does not put the Wife in an equal position with the Husband given the differential in their earning capacity. An award of alimony is based on the duty and ability of one spouse to support the other spouse. An award of a property division is based on the joint contributions of the spouse to the marital enterprise."

In our opinion, these findings and the judge's resulting determination not to include the wife's investment income in setting the alimony award, fairly address the inequitable result which would result were the wife, in lieu of alimony payments from the husband, required unilaterally to satisfy her needs and living expenses from investment income from the assets allocated to her as part of the division of property. This is in contrast to the husband, who had the capacity to earn income sufficient to meet both parties' needs without using his own investment income. [Note 13]

Given the considerable discretion accorded a judge in fashioning an alimony award pursuant to G. L. c. 208, § 34, see Bernier v. Bernier, 449 Mass. 774 , 793 (2007), we cannot say that the judge's refusal to "factor" the wife's investment income in determining the wife's needs constitutes error.

A final comment is in order. Notwithstanding the judge's

refusal to "factor" in the wife's investment income for purposes of alimony, there is a real possibility in this case that the wife will be unable to meet her downsized needs (even if fixed at an amount somewhat less than $97,000) without utilizing a portion of the investment income flowing from the assets allocated to her in the divorce. The wife's employment income ($54,500) and the alimony award ($37,000) are fully taxable to her.

8. Child-related expenses included within wife's needs. The husband argues that the wife's financial statement and admissions at trial demonstrate that the judge erroneously included $23,000 of expenses related to the youngest child and approximately $6,000 of nonexistent expenses in determining the award of alimony. [Note 14] He asserts that the wife's needs actually approximate $68,000, not the $97,000 found by the judge. The husband contends that the inclusion of any of these child-related expenses as a factor in the determination of alimony was legal error. [Note 15] See Saia v. Saia, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 135 , 137-138 (2003) ("Alimony

is governed by G. L. c. 208, § 34, which does not recognize expenses of caring for dependent children among the factors to be considered in determining alimony"). But cf. Child Support Guidelines II-A. [Note 16]

Upon review of the record, it appears that certain child-related expenses may have been improperly or redundantly included within the $97,136 of total expenses upon which the judge based the alimony award. Remand to the Probate and Family Court is necessary so that the judge can determine whether there were any child-related expenses which were improperly included in the determination of the wife's needs for the alimony award, and if any such child-related expenses were so improperly included, the judge should adjust the alimony and child support orders, as the judge deems appropriate (see, e.g., our final comment to section 7, supra). [Note 17] The judge may hold such further hearings as she deems necessary. Further findings of fact should be made.

As to the husband's other contention, we perceive no merit in

the assertion that the judge improperly considered nonexistent expenses.

9. Attorney's fees. The husband was also ordered to pay the wife (from his share of the net proceeds of the sale of the former marital home) the sum of $15,937.50 toward her legal fees. In determining that the husband should be responsible for the legal fees incurred by the wife from the commencement to the completion of the trial itself in the amount of $15,937.50, the judge found that "[t]he husband did not have a reasonable basis for refusing to even discuss any offer for child support and alimony" and, in addition, that the husband "chose to pursue a lengthy trial on the issue(s) calling several experts." We believe the award of attorney's fees was fully within the judge's discretion, the reasons for the award were warranted, and the amount awarded was reasonable. See Moriarty v. Stone, 41 Mass. App. Ct. at 159 Downey v. Downey, 55 Mass. App. Ct. 812 , 819 (2002).

10. Conclusion. Paragraphs 2 through 4 of the judgment of divorce nisi (insofar as those paragraphs may be affected by resolution on remand by the probate judge of the three questions concerning the child-related expenses addressed in note 15, supra) are vacated. The matter is remanded to the Probate and Family Court for further proceedings on the three discrete questions in note 15, supra. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. Pending the entry of new orders, the judge may make such temporary orders as she may deem appropriate. See Adlakha v. Adlakha, 65 Mass. App. Ct. 860 , 872 (2006). The wife's request for double costs and appellate attorney's fees pursuant to Mass.R.A.P. 25, as appearing in 376 Mass. 949 (1979), is denied.

[Note 1] The eldest child was twenty-four years of age and emancipated at the time of trial. The middle child, who resided with the husband, was twenty-one years of age, and would be emancipated upon his graduation from college in May, 2004. The youngest child, who resided with the wife, was seventeen years of age and a senior in high school at the time of trial, and planned to attend college.

[Note 2] The husband filed a complaint for divorce in March, 2001.

[Note 3] The judge's findings on the husband's lack of employment are clear and direct.

"Since his resignation from [his former firm] the Court finds that the Husband has made minimal attempts to obtain employment. He testified that he has made no attempts to interview with any law firms since the separation. . . .

"Instead of working the Husband has chosen to substantially deplete his assets to pay for his expense. . . . Therefore the Court rejects his request that the Court enforce the 'agreement' that the parties had reached to allow him to substantially downscale his income and lifestyle. In fact, the only thing that the Husband has done in furtherance of this new lifestyle is to quit his job."

[Note 4] Because the husband had not been paying alimony during the pendency of the proceedings, the judge's orders also directed the husband to make a lump-sum payment of alimony in the amount of $91,788.66 for the period between January 1, 2002, and June 25, 2004, the date the judgment was issued.

[Note 5] The attribution of income to the husband in this case captures both alimony and child support orders. The husband focuses his appellate challenge on the alimony component. However, the attribution of income in the alimony context is not different in rationale from that in the child support context. In the area of attributed income in the child support context, see Child Support Guidelines II-C & H, and, in particular, Guideline II-H, which sets forth factors to be considered:

"If the court makes a determination that a party is earning substantially less than he or she could through reasonable effort, the court may consider potential earning capacity rather than actual earnings. In making this determination, the court shall take into consideration the education, training, and past employment history of the party. These standards are intended to be applied where a finding has been made that the party is capable of working and is unemployed, working part-time or is working a job, trade, or profession other than that for which he/she has been trained."

[Note 6] As to the husband's expenses, the judge found as follows:

"The Husband's needs for himself and [the middle child], according to his most recent financial statement, are $2,000 per week, or $104,000 per year. Once [the middle child] is emancipated [in May, 2004, upon graduation from college] it is anticipated that his [the husband's] needs will reduce."

(Though utilizing the needs figure found by the judge [$104,000] in arguing that the amount of income attributed to him was excessive, the husband noted correctly in a footnote in his principal brief that his needs and those of the middle child, as stated on his financial statement, were actually somewhat less.)

[Note 7] At a posttrial hearing on a motion to stay the judgment, the husband pressed as a basis for the stay that he would be raising an appellate challenge to the income attribution, including that the judge had not stated a sum certain. In response to this contention, the judge commented that one reason she had not set forth a "specific amount" was that "nothing . . . was presented" during trial. The judge's point is well taken in that the evidence at trial indicated that the husband was not working and was without any income, i.e., the husband had a zero income baseline. Indeed, at the posttrial hearing, in responding to the husband's contention about the absence of a specific amount, the judge observed as follows:

"I had difficulty as to what was presented to me by both [the husband's] expert [and] . . . his figure that he was obviously earning $75 thousand a year, but there was not a figure that I could pick. [Instead], I made the finding . . . that he had the ability to pay the order which I have to say and I said it in my findings, [is not] an extraordinary order [under] the circumstance."

[Note 8] The husband estimates (and from that estimate, complains) that the financial effect of annual alimony and child support, when added to the husband's own annual living expenses, translates to approximately $190,000 in attributed income. Even if this were an accurate estimate -- which it is not -- in light of the husband's past substantial earnings, that figure may have been sustainable. The delta between the figure that is addressed in this appeal, $170,000-$175,000, and the husband's estimate of $190,000, is not great. In any event, the husband's estimate is too high, and is based on a miscalculation of the expenses listed on the husband's financial statement by ignoring, for example, that a portion of the husband's expenses -- expenses associated with the middle child living with the husband, such as the child's food, clothing, automobile insurance, unreimbursed medical expenses, etc., would be reduced, as the judge found, upon the middle child's emancipation by graduation from college in May, 2004.

[Note 9] In his brief, the husband heavily relies on the testimony of Cullis, who was a consultant for attorney placement. In the husband's direct case, Cullis opined that while the husband had "been very, very successful and effective in satisfying the needs of clients and doing it efficiently and in a reasonably cost-effective way," the husband would have a difficult time being accepted into the partnership of a new law firm because of his age and the fact that he no longer had a existing client book of business. However, on cross-examination, Cullis acknowledged that the husband's "real technical capabilities" and his familiarity with the "whole energy regulatory side and working with energy companies doing energy deals" were skill sets that could be transferable to other law areas. For example, Cullis stated that a corporate environment is often a more "family friendly" environment than a law firm for lateral transfers, and that he had seen successful former partners of law firms (such as the husband) transition into an in-house position in a corporation's general counsel's office.

[Note 10] If, after diligent search for more remunerative employment, "the judge's predictions concerning the husband's future employment [and earnings] fail to materialize," the husband would not be precluded from filing a complaint for modification. See Gordon v. Gordon, 26 Mass. App. Ct. 973 , 975 (1988).

[Note 11] The husband testified that he applied to teach in various high schools in the Washington, D.C., area, though he had never taught before. Similarly, the husband applied for a position as an appellate lawyer with a public defender's office though he had no criminal experience.

[Note 12] The husband also argues that the judge failed to consider adequately that he has health problems which may impact upon his ability to obtain employment in a law firm. That is not so. The judge, noting that the husband himself had testified that he would be able to work forty to fifty hours per week (as long as his employment did not involve late-night work and long and frequent travel), found specifically that the husband's ailments would not prevent him from working a full-time job, including the practice of law.

[Note 13] The judge also found that although each party should have received similar income from the assets received by them, the husband (unlike the wife who obtained employment pursuant to the parties' decision to downsize) dissipated more of his assets than the wife based on his choice to remain unemployed. In listing this as a reason for declining to rely on the parties' income streams, it would appear that the judge, among other things, did not wish to penalize the wife for her diligent search for employment.

[Note 14] By an order dated March 24, 2005, a single justice of this court allowed, in part, the husband's motion for stay of the alimony award of $37,000, noting that it appeared that $17,577 (actually $17,597) of child-related expenses (consisting of medical expenses for the child in the amount of $3,073 and child care expenses of $4,524 and approximately $10,000) was erroneously included in the alimony award. The single justice ordered that $17,577 of the yearly alimony award be stayed pending appeal and that the husband pay the wife, as alimony, $373.50 per week pending appeal.

[Note 15] In his brief, and in a letter to this court dated November 28, 2007, in response to questions put to the husband's counsel at oral argument, the husband identifies three categories of child support expenses which, he asserts, are included within the wife's needs of $97,136.

First, the husband argues that the wife listed on her financial statement, in a separate schedule of expenses exclusively for the youngest child, the amount of $10,114 ($194.50 per week) the judge found $9,048 of this amount to be unreimbursed child support expenses and ordered the husband to pay one-half that amount ($4,524, or $87 per week) as child support. The husband asserts that the judge failed to remove any of the $10,114 from the $97,136 needs figure.

Second, the husband asserts the judge included in the $97,136 needs figure medical and medical insurance expenses for the youngest child in the amount of $6,146, half of which ($3,073), under the parties' agreement, the husband was required to reimburse the wife. (But see section 5 of the agreement, where the husband agreed to pay to the wife one-half of the wife's "out-of-pocket cost to maintain [medical] insurance during the period in which one or both of [the youngest and middle child] are insured under said medical insurance plan and neither party is paying child support to the other.") The husband asserts that these two categories of child-related expenses were included in the alimony award improperly and redundantly.

Third, the husband identifies an additional category consisting of the youngest child's portion of $26,728 in other expenses (which the husband has estimated as $10,000) that, the husband says, the wife testified she spent upon herself and the youngest child. The husband maintains that these expenditures, while not duplicative of child support expenses found by the court or agreed upon in the agreement, should have been considered as a basis for child support rather than alimony. (Contrary to the wife's assertion in her brief, the expenses to which the husband points are not, for the most part, "housing related" costs.) We recognize that there may be instances where it is simply impractical or unrealistic to parse an expenditure between a care provider and a dependent child who resides with the provider.

[Note 16] Neither party has cited to or discussed Child Support Guidelines II-A, which provides, in relevant part: "So long as the standard of living of the children is not diminished, these guidelines do not preclude the court from deciding that any order be denominated in whole or in part as alimony or as a separate maintenance payment." To the contrary, on the issue raised, both parties cite to the Saia decision. We note that the youngest child had attained the age of eighteen at the time of the entry of the divorce judgment and that the judge did not purport to adhere strictly to the Guidelines.

[Note 17] Although the husband does not request in his brief that the child support order be vacated, he agrees in his letter of November 28, 2007, that if the court reduces the alimony award, the child support award should be increased by one-half of the third category of expenses (see note 15, supra) because child support is the responsibility of both parties.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Trial Court Law Libraries. Questions about legal information? Contact Reference Librarians.


‘“There were so many different things that have happened over the last year in our organization in terms of the on-ice, off-ice, staffing, and you learn from every single one of those,” Adams said. “I’d say that, for me, I think that I approach every conversation I’m in trying to learn and grow. I also learned from the ups and downs, the emotion of the season and how to balance the emotion of it all with the long term, what’s best. Trying to balance all that and keep perspective, while you’re learning at the same time.”‘

‘The whole idea is to make your team better. Now, this isn’t going to happen, but what if the Leafs offered Auston Matthews for Eichel? What if the Bruins included Brad Marchand or David Pastrnak in an Eichel deal? You say no to that just because they’re in your division? Because of Twitter, I need to stress again, none of those offers have been made.’

The Sabres Report - June 20, 2021


Daily Rome Shot 188

Safe house for Trad Priests during the Great Purge of’22-‘26?

It must have been a remarkable experience, Father Z., for you to have known and been close with the beloved gentleman in residence behind that imposing gate.

Think, proof read, preview BEFORE posting! Prekliči odgovor

You must be logged in to post a comment.

SHOPPING ONLINE? Please, come here first!

Thinking about Father's Day? (Pssst - It's 20 June.

About this blog…

“This blog is like a fusion of the Baroque ‘salon’ with its well-tuned harpsichord around which polite society gathered for entertainment and edification and, on the other hand, a Wild West “saloon” with its out-of-tune piano and swinging doors, where everyone has a gun and something to say. Nevertheless, we try to point our discussions back to what it is to be Catholic in this increasingly difficult age, to love God, and how to get to heaven.” – Fr. Z


This REALLY helps! And it’s great coffee (and tea)

Wonderful about St. Joseph! “Terror of Demons”

Donate using VENMO

CLICK and say your daily offerings!

A Daily Prayer for Priests

Do you want to show some appreciation?

Do you have a faithful Catholic website that needs competent and reliable tech support?

Fr. Z’s VOICEMAIL

Nota bene: I do not answer these numbers or this Skype address. You won't get me "live". I check for messages regularly.


WDTPRS


020 8133 4535


651-447-6265

YOUR RECENT COMMENTS

Books which you must have.

I use this when I travel both in these USA and abroad. Very useful. Fast enough for Zoom. I connect my DMR (ham radio) through it. If you use my link, they give me more data. A GREAT back up.

Get ready…

Don’t rely on popes, bishops and priests.

“He [Satan] will set up a counter-Church which will be the ape of the Church because, he the devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the anti-Christ that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ. In desperate need for God, whom he nevertheless refuses to adore, modern man in his loneliness and frustration will hunger more and more for membership in a community that will give him enlargement of purpose, but at the cost of losing himself in some vague collectivity.”
“Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, and the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops.”

Send Snail Mail to Fr. Z

Fr John Zuhlsdorf
Tridentine Mass Society of Madison
733 Struck St.
PO BOX 44603
Madison, WI 53744-4603

“The modern habit of doing ceremonial things unceremoniously is no proof of humility rather it proves the offender's inability to forget himself in the rite, and his readiness to spoil for every one else the proper pleasure of ritual.”

This blog has to earn its keep!

PLEASE subscribe via PayPal if it is useful.

That way I have steady income I can plan on, and you wind up regularly on my list of benefactors for whom I pray and for whom I periodically say Holy Mass.

In view of the rapidly changing challenges I now face, I would like to add more $10/month subscribers. Will you please help?

As for Latin…

"But if, in any layman who is indeed imbued with literature, ignorance of the Latin language, which we can truly call the 'catholic' language, indicates a certain sluggishness in his love toward the Church, how much more fitting it is that each and every cleric should be adequately practiced and skilled in that language!" - Pius XI

"Let us realize that this remark of Cicero (Brutus 37, 140) can be in a certain way referred to [young lay people]: 'It is not so much a matter of distinction to know Latin as it is disgraceful not to know it.'" - St. John Paul II

Recent Posts

  • DEVELOPMENT re: St Peter’s TLM Suppression. This could say something about rumored attack on Summorum Pontificum
  • 22 June (Novus Ordo): St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More
  • Daily Rome Shot 196
  • UPDATE: Carmels and Carmelite nuns moving to new places
  • Daily Rome Shot 195
  • Amazon Prime Day!
  • ASK FATHER: In confession, the priest insisted on his Act of Contrition rather than the one I know.
  • News From The Chaplain: “Bomb go boom”
  • Daily Rome Shot 194
  • WDTPRS – 4th Sunday after Pentecost: “O Captain, my Captain!”
  • Daily Rome Shot 193
  • CQ CQ CQ: Ham Radio – #ZedNet reminder – 20 June ’21
  • VIDEO: Test your LIZARD’s DNA!
  • Cause for canonization advances for World War II hero, Army Air Corps chaplain Fr LT Joseph Verbis Lafleur
  • In a time when 75% of US Catholics don’t believe in the Real Presence… NEWSFLASH. … 75% of bishops vote to teach about the Eucharist!
  • Update on Fr. Dana Christensen, warrior priest
  • Daily Rome Shot 192
  • Sober thoughts about a rumored restricting of Summorum Pontificum. Wherein Fr. Z rants.
  • A CANCELLED PRIEST SPEAKS: #00
  • ASK FATHER: Are those who must read the Liturgy of the Hours, obliged to read it aloud? Vocal recitation?
  • PRAYER REQUEST: Cancelled priests
  • Daily Rome Shot 191
  • Daily Rome Shot 190
  • Happy Birthday @Card_R_Sarah
  • That’s not what I expected to see.
  • URGENT: Prayers for Fr. Tim Finigan
  • Daily Rome Shot 189
  • Mass with Francis and Biden nixed
  • Daily Rome Shot 188
  • ASK FATHER: Can deacons use the Rituale Romanum to bless things?

Let us pray…

Grant unto thy Church, we beseech Thee, O merciful God, that She, being gathered together by the Holy Ghost, may be in no wise troubled by attack from her foes. O God, who by sin art offended and by penance pacified, mercifully regard the prayers of Thy people making supplication unto Thee,and turn away the scourges of Thine anger which we deserve for our sins. Almighty and Everlasting God, in whose Hand are the power and the government of every realm: look down upon and help the Christian people that the heathen nations who trust in the fierceness of their own might may be crushed by the power of thine Arm. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. R. Amen.

Yes, Fr. Z is taking ads…

Be a “Zed-Head”!

CHALLENGE COINS!

My "challenge coin" for my 25th anniversary of ordination in 2016.

Want one? I do exchanges with military and LEOs, etc.

PLEASE RESPOND. Pretty pleeeease?

This is really useful when travelling… and also when you aren’t and you need backup internet NOW! I use this for my DMR “Zednet” hotspot when I’m mobile. It’s a ham radio thing.

If you travel internationally, this is a super useful gizmo for your mobile internet data. I use one. If you get one through my link, I get data rewards.

Please use my links when shopping! I depend on your help.

WDTPRS POLL

Fr. Z’s stuff is everywhere

Help support Fr. Z’s Gospel of Life work at no cost to you. Do you need a Real Estate Agent? Calling these people is the FIRST thing you should do!

They find you a pro-life agent in your area who commits to giving a portion of the fee to a pro-life group!


GREAT causes to support

Help Monks in Wyoming (coffee – UPDATED LINK) and Norcia (beer) and the wonderful "Soap Sisters" of Summit, NJ!

Please follow me on Twitter!

My Twitter – @fatherz

This catechism helped to bring Fr. Z into the Catholic Church!

Some Blogs I Keep Track Of

Kategorije

Useful WDTPRS References

Blogs by priests

Support Military Chaplains!

SOME HELPFUL PAGES

Some Useful Liturgical Books

Sun and Band Conditions

What people say about Fr. Z

"The great Father Zed, Archiblogopoios" - Fr. John Hunwicke

"Some 2 bit novus ordo cleric" - Anonymous

"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned." - Kractivism

"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"
"Zuhlsdorf is an eccentric with no real consequences" - HERE
- Michael Sean Winters

"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest." - Anna Arco

“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.” - Comment

"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury." - Sam Rocha

"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night." - Comment

"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine." - Anonymous

Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD - Comment

Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right. - America Magazine

RC integralist who prays like an evangelical fundamentalist. -Austen Ivereigh on Twitter

[T]he even more mainline Catholic Fr. Z. blog. -Deus Ex Machina

“For me the saddest thing about Father Z’s blog is how cruel it is. It’s astonishing to me that a priest could traffic in such cruelty and hatred.” - Jesuit homosexualist James Martin to BuzzFeed

"Fr. Z's is one of the more cheerful blogs out there and he is careful about keeping the crazies out of his commboxes" - Paul in comment at 1 Peter 5

"I am a Roman Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
I am a TLM-going Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
And I am in a state of grace today, in no small part, because of your blog."
- Tom in comment

"Thank you for the delightful and edifying omnibus that is your blog."- Reader comment.

"Fr. Z disgraces his priesthood as a grifter, a liar, and a bully. - - Mark Shea


The Battle of Actium

At the Battle of Actium, off the western coast of Greece, Roman leader Octavian wins a decisive victory against the forces of Roman Mark Antony and Cleopatra, queen of Egypt. Before their forces suffered final defeat, Antony and Cleopatra broke though the enemy lines and fled to Egypt, where they would commit suicide the following year.

With the assassination of Roman dictator Julius Caesar in 44 B.C., Rome fell into civil war. To end the fighting, a coalition—the Second Triumvirate—was formed by three of the strongest belligerents. The triumvirate was made up of Octavian, Caesar’s great-nephew and chosen heir Mark Antony, a powerful general and Lepidus, a Roman statesman. The empire was divided among the three, and Antony took up the administration of the eastern provinces. Upon arriving in Asia Minor, he summoned Queen Cleopatra to answer charges that she had aided his enemies. Cleopatra, ruler of Egypt since 51 B.C., had once been Julius Caesar’s lover and had borne him a child, who she named Caesarion, meaning “little Caesar.”

Cleopatra sought to seduce Antony as she had Caesar before him, and in 41 B.C. arrived at Tarsus on a magnificent river barge, dressed as Venus, the Roman goddess of love. Successful in her efforts, Antony returned with her to Alexandria, where they spent the winter in debauchery. In 40 B.C., Antony returned to Rome and married Octavian’s sister Octavia in an effort to mend his increasingly strained relationship with Octavian. The triumvirate, however, continued to deteriorate. In 37 B.C. Antony separated from Octavia and traveled to the East, arranging for Cleopatra to join him in Syria. In their time apart, Cleopatra had borne him twins, a son and a daughter. According to Octavian’s propagandists, the lovers were then married, which violated the Roman law restricting Romans from marrying foreigners.

Antony’s disastrous military campaign against Parthia in 36 B.C. further reduced his prestige, but in 34 B.C. he was more successful against Armenia. To celebrate the victory, he staged a triumphal procession through the streets of Alexandria, in which Antony and Cleopatra sat on golden thrones, and their children were given imposing royal titles. Many in Rome, spurred on by Octavian, interpreted the spectacle as a sign that Antony intended to deliver the Roman Empire into alien hands.

After several more years of tension and propaganda attacks, Octavian declared war against Cleopatra, and therefore Antony, in 31 B.C. Enemies of Octavian rallied to Antony’s side, but Octavian’s brilliant military commanders gained early successes against his forces. On September 2, 31 B.C., their fleets clashed at Actium in Greece. After heavy fighting, Cleopatra broke from the engagement and set course for Egypt with 60 of her ships. Antony then broke through the enemy line and followed her. The disheartened fleet that remained surrendered to Octavian. One week later, Antony’s land forces surrendered.

Although they had suffered a decisive defeat, it was nearly a year before Octavian reached Alexandria and again defeated Antony. In the aftermath of the battle, Cleopatra took refuge in the mausoleum she had had built for herself. Antony, informed that Cleopatra was dead, stabbed himself with his sword. Before he died, another messenger arrived, saying Cleopatra still lived. Antony was carried to Cleopatra’s retreat, where he died after bidding her to make her peace with Octavian. When the triumphant Roman arrived, she attempted to seduce him, but he resisted her charms. Rather than fall under Octavian’s domination, Cleopatra committed suicide, possibly by means of an asp, a poisonous Egyptian serpent and symbol of divine royalty.


Poglej si posnetek: BK Kungota - priprave 2009 (Junij 2022).