The retirement option of the divorced spouse should reflectthe equitable distribution formula set forth in Majauskas McVeigh v Curry, 2012 NY Slip Op 07091, Appellate Division,Second Department
In amatrimonial action, Supreme Court directed the plaintiff to furnish her formerspouse with a copy of her birth certificate essentially for the purposes of hiselecting the 100% joint and survivor option of his pension fund or hisobtaining life insurance and directed the defendant to elect either the 100%joint and survivor option of his pension fund or obtain life insurance to coverher 50% share of the marital portion of her former spouse's pension.
The Appellate Division modified the order issued by SupremeCourt, explaining the Supreme Court erred in directing the plaintiff tofurnish her former spouse with a copy of her birth certificate only for thepurposes of his electing the 100% joint and survivor option of his pension fundor his obtaining appropriate life insurance, as that option could potentiallyresult in an award to the plaintiff that is more than she is entitled to underthe equitable distribution formula enunciated in Majauskas v Majauskas (61NY2d 481).
The court observed that the 100% joint and survivor optionwould, upon the plaintiff's former husband’s death, provide her with the fullmonthly retirement allowance of her former husband's pension for the rest ofher life.
In contrast, Option 3 of the defendant's pension fund, the50% joint and survivor option, would, upon the defendant's death, provide theplaintiff with 50% of the original monthly retirement allowance for the rest ofher life.*
Noting that the 50% joint and survivor option is closer tothe equitable distribution formula set forth in Majauskas, the AppellateDivision ruled that the Supreme Court’s order must be modified as indicated.
* Not mentioned in theopinion is the difference in the amount of the monthly retirement allowance thatwould be paid to the plaintiff’s former husband under the 100% joint andsurvivor option in contrast to the amount that would be paid to him under “Option3.”
The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_07091.htm
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder