In Post-Judgment Matrimonial Action, Court Denies Motion to Modify Life Insurance Policy

author by Joseph C. Maya on Mar. 14, 2024

Divorce & Family Law 

Summary: In a post-judgment dissolution of marriage action pending in the Judicial District of Stamford, the Court denied an ex-husband’s motion to modify his life insurance policy, even though it modified, and drastically reduced, his alimony obligation.  By way of background, the parties’ marriage was dissolved on November 5, 1999 after they entered into a separation agreement.  Pursuant to that agreement, the Husband was obligated to maintain a life insurance policy with a face amount of $250,000 naming his ex-wife as an irrevocable beneficiary thereof.  At that point, the ex-husband’s net monthly income was $9,829.51.

Marriage Dissolution

At the time of the post-judgment hearing, the ex-husband was sixty-six years of age, retired and in declining health.  His net monthly income was $1,357.17.  The Court found that the reduction in his income and decline in his financial condition since the date of dissolution constituted a substantial change in circumstances, and reduced his alimony obligation from $6,270.00 per month to $2,500.00 per month.  The ex-husband requested that the Court reduce his life insurance obligation accordingly.

The Court’s Decision

In its decision, the Court noted that although a life insurance policy is ordinarily considered property subject to distribution, and thus is ordinarily non-modifiable, where it is awarded as security for alimony, it is modifiable upon a substantial change in circumstances. Nevertheless, the Court denied the ex-husband’s motion, finding that even the policy of $250,000.00 did not provide adequate security given the ex-wife’s life expectancy as compared to the new alimony Order of $2,500.00 per month.

The Court also found that the ex-husband may no longer be insurable, and, therefore, if the alimony was increased or the modification reversed upon Appellate review, the ex-husband would be in a potentially impossible position of having to acquire a new life insurance policy.


Maya Murphy P.C. has proudly been included in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®, ranked among the top firms in the nation. In addition, Managing Partner Joseph C. Maya has been selected to The Best Lawyers in America® 2024 for his work in Employment Law and Education Law in Connecticut. Recognition in Best Lawyers® is awarded to firms and attorneys who demonstrate excellence in the industry, and is widely regarded by both clients and legal professionals as a significant honor.

Our firm in Westport, Connecticut serves clients with legal assistance all over the state, including the towns of: Ansonia, Beacon Falls, Bethany, Bethel, Branford, Bridgeport, Brookfield, Cheshire, Danbury, Darien, Derby, East Haven, Easton, Fairfield, Greenwich, Guilford, Hamden, Madison, Meriden, Middlebury, Milford, Monroe, Naugatuck, New Canaan, New Fairfield, New Haven, Newton, North Branford, North Haven, Norwalk, Orange, Oxford, Prospect, Redding, Ridgefield, Seymour, Shelton, Sherman, Southbury, Stamford, Stratford, Trumbull, Wallingford, Waterbury, West Haven, Weston, Westport, Wilton, and Woodbridge. In addition to assisting clients in Connecticut, our firm handles education law and employment law matters in New York as well. 

If you have any questions about employment law or education law in Connecticut, or would like to speak to an attorney about a legal matter, please contact Joseph C. Maya and the other experienced attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com to schedule a free initial consultation today.

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.