The case “Wooters v. Wooters” involves a divorce judgment where Thomas A. Wooters was ordered to pay alimony to Janet S. Wooters. The judgment specified that the alimony would be one-third of Thomas’s gross annual employment income, without deductions for various contributions and premiums. Initially, Thomas was a partner at a law firm, but later he became an executive vice president and general counsel for LoJack Corporation, where his compensation included stock options. The case addressed whether income from exercised stock options should be considered part of his gross annual income for alimony calculations. The Appeals Court concluded that stock options exercised by Thomas should be included in his income for alimony purposes. However, despite failing to pay the required alimony, Thomas was not found in contempt because his actions did not constitute clear disobedience of a clear command, as the court considered the totality of circumstances, including agreements between the parties.