Ability to save


Ms. Nevicosi:

There is nothing in the Order that addresses the plaintiff’s ability to amass assets nor anything that addresses his expenses which were presented on his affidavit as over 9,000 per month. The Court completely ignored my affidavit and awarded me only the amount of my allowance to cover my expenses. There is nothing in the Order that indicates the plaintiff has the ability to increase his retirement account by 40,000 each year or the fact that he has excess income which allows him to invest and save over 100,000 per year. Would his ability to amass such substantial savings and therefore, increase his income over time not count as a substantial change of circumstances? The income disparity is already at 20,000 difference per month with him having the ability, over time, to widen that margin while I stagnate and stay forever at the same level. I know some Orders can be changed just based on the fact that fundamental fairness needs to come into play. Thanks.