Articles Tagged with pension

does-adultery-affect-alimony-in-idaho-1080x600-1When the parties to a Texas divorce agree on a property division, they may agree that certain obligations or conditions must be met.  If a party fails to meet their obligations as agreed to and set forth in the divorce decree, they may not be entitled to the property they were expecting.  In a recent case, a husband challenged a court order requiring him to reimburse the wife for certain tax liabilities after she failed to provide him the documentation required to calculate the amount he owed in accordance with the decree.

Wife Fails to Comply with Requirements of Divorce Decree

The parties’ mediated settlement agreement was incorporated into their divorce decree. The decree required the wife to withdraw funds from the husband’s pension plan. After paying certain debts, her attorney was to distribute 30% of the remainder to the wife and 70% to the husband. The decree required the husband to reimburse the wife 70% of her income tax liability for those funds. The decree ordered the wife have two draft income tax returns prepared, one showing the pension plan funds as income and the other not including the funds, to allow the husband to calculate that reimbursement. She was to provide the husband with the draft returns by June 1 of the year after the year the funds were liquidated.

The wife hired a tax preparation company.  The first draft return was a joint return with her new husband and included his wages, her wages, her social security disability income, and the liquidated pension plan funds.  The second draft return indicated it was a joint return, but only included her wages.  She sent the drafts to the husband before the deadline. He informed her he needed a draft return that included only her wages and the liquidated pension plan funds.  The wife went back to the tax preparer multiple times, but said they kept getting it wrong.

Continue Reading ›

iStock-543681178Under federal law, a court may not treat military disability benefits as community property for purposes of property distribution in a Texas divorce case. A husband recently challenged the property distribution in his divorce decree, arguing the court had improperly divided a portion of his military disability benefits.

Trial Court Divides Husband’s Military Retirement Benefits

The wife petitioned for divorce and sought a majority of the community assets.  The court granted the divorce on grounds of insupportability and adultery.  The decree gave the wife 55% of the husband’s disposable military retired pay, attorney’s fees, and conditional appellate attorney’s fees. The husband appealed.

The husband contended the 55% of his disposable military retired pay awarded to the wife erroneously included disability payments. The wife, however, argued the award did not include disability benefits and the decree had specifically awarded him his “VA Disability and Social Security Disability benefits” as separate property.

Continue Reading ›

retireRetirement benefits can be a complex and contentious issue in a Texas divorce case.  Generally, any income earned during marriage is considered community property unless proven to be separate property, including funds contributed to a retirement account or earned as pension benefits.  In a recent case, a husband challenged a court’s order awarding a portion of his military retirement benefits to his ex-wife.

According to the appeals court’s opinion, the wife petitioned for enforcement of property division by contempt, alleging the husband had not paid her the retirement benefits awarded to her in their divorce decree.  The husband argued the military benefits had either been awarded to him or had not been divided at the time of the divorce.

The wife filed an amended motion to clarify, asking the court to enter a clarifying order if it found any part of the previous order was not specific enough for enforcement through contempt.  She specifically asked the court to clarify the order to reflect the length of the marriage and the husband’s dates of military service.  She also asked the court to sign a Military Qualified Domestic Relations Order.

Continue Reading ›

In a positively surprising ruling, a federal Court refused to dismiss a hearing where FedEx denied survivor benefits to a same-sex spouse. The Plaintiff is Stacy Schuett and she was in a committed relationship for 27 years with her spouse when they were finally married in a civil ceremony in Sonoma County in June of 2013. A day later, her wife, Lesly Taboada-Hall passed away after a long struggle with cancer. The deceased wife worked for FedEx for 26 years and was fully vested in her company’s retirement plan. It was not until six days after her death that same-sex marriage licenses were available in the state of California. At this time, the surviving spouse, Stacy Schuett, submitted a claim as a surviving spouse entitling her to her deceased wife’s pension plan, but FedEx immediately denied her claim because they said she did not meet the definition of “spouse.”

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information