No. 25-189

Ron J. Waterman v. Robyn B. Waterman

Lower Court: Massachusetts
Docketed: 2025-08-15
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: due-process federal-law-interpretation fourteenth-amendment judgment-modification state-court-jurisdiction variable-separation-incentive
Key Terms:
ERISA DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2025-11-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether States can independently interpret federal laws regarding Variable Separation Incentive (VSI) as a retirement benefit, and whether Massachusetts violated due process by altering a 20-year-old final judgment

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

ONE A dozen States' Appellate Courts have issued opinions holding that Variable Separation Incentive (VSI) is a retirement benefit/pension. Subsequently, Massachusetts courts ruled VSI is not a retirement benefit/pension. Are States free to interpret federal laws however each prefers, or is Massachusetts incorrect? (Or are the dozen other states?) QUESTION TWO Massachusetts altered a 1999 Judgment that had been final for 20 years. Does this violate U.S. Constitution Fourteenth Amendment Due Process? Petition for Writ of Certiorari 1 PARTIES All parties appear in the caption on the cover. PROCEEDINGS BELOW In Norfolk County, Mass. Family Court's Dkt. No. 98D0300, Ron Waterman, Plaintiff vs. Robyn Waterman, Defendant, Judgment of Divorce was final in 1999.

Docket Entries

2025-11-10
Petition DENIED.
2025-10-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
2025-10-07
Brief of respondent Robyn Waterman in opposition filed.
2025-09-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 15, 2025.
2025-09-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 15, 2025 to October 15, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2025-01-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 15, 2025)

Attorneys

Robyn Waterman
Robyn Nadeau — Respondent
Robyn Nadeau — Respondent
Ron Waterman
Ron J. Waterman — Petitioner
Ron J. Waterman — Petitioner