Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo Date: 1995-10-11. Machine-draft public headnote: Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

QDRO: lity thereon. The court reserves jurisdiction over any disputes arising over the disposition of this asset. (7) The Pitney Bowes shares of stock owned by the parties shall be equally divided between them. (8) The defendant shall assign to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) fifty (50%) percent of his interest valued as of August 14, 1995, in his Pitney Bowes Pension Plan and shown and described on the defendant's financial affidavit, and one-hundred (100%) percent of the defendant's Pitney Bowes 401K Plan, also valued as of August 14, 1995. The plaintiff's attorney shall draft said QDROs. The court retains jurisdictio


Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

pension: shares of stock owned by the parties shall be equally divided between them. (8) The defendant shall assign to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) fifty (50%) percent of his interest valued as of August 14, 1995, in his Pitney Bowes Pension Plan and shown and described on the defendant's financial affidavit, and one-hundred (100%) percent of the defendant's Pitney Bowes 401K Plan, also valued as of August 14, 1995. The plaintiff's attorney shall draft said QDROs. The court retains jurisdiction over this matter to review, approve and modify said CT Page 11310 QDROs to comply with federal and st


Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

401(k): Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) fifty (50%) percent of his interest valued as of August 14, 1995, in his Pitney Bowes Pension Plan and shown and described on the defendant's financial affidavit, and one-hundred (100%) percent of the defendant's Pitney Bowes 401K Plan, also valued as of August 14, 1995. The plaintiff's attorney shall draft said QDROs. The court retains jurisdiction over this matter to review, approve and modify said CT Page 11310 QDROs to comply with federal and state law relating to retirement/pension plans. (9) There are United States savings bonds in the possession of the defendant that are reg


Elizabeth Cuozzo v. Pasquale Cuozzo

domestic relations order: on. The court reserves jurisdiction over any disputes arising over the disposition of this asset. (7) The Pitney Bowes shares of stock owned by the parties shall be equally divided between them. (8) The defendant shall assign to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) fifty (50%) percent of his interest valued as of August 14, 1995, in his Pitney Bowes Pension Plan and shown and described on the defendant's financial affidavit, and one-hundred (100%) percent of the defendant's Pitney Bowes 401K Plan, also valued as of August 14, 1995. The plaintiff's attorney shall draft said QDROs. The court retains jurisdictio


Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks

Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks Date: 1994-01-03. Machine-draft public headnote: Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to ERISA / defined contribution issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks


Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks

QDRO: tiff harmless with respect to this obligation. 9. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff $10,000.00 as a lump sum property settlement. 10. The parties' retirement and profit sharing plans shall be shared equally, and the plaintiff's counsel shall prepare a QDRO to effectuate this order. 11. The wife shall, for as long as it is available to her through her employment, maintain the health insurance for the minor children. All uninsured medical, dental, including orthodontia expenses, and ophthalmological expenses incurred on behalf of the children shall be split equally by the parties. The parties shall specifical


Ellen P. Banks v. David Banks

401(k): stimating child support the figures for which were not given by either counsel, the court is accepting the figures on the parties' financial affidavits as true. The plaintiff works for the law firm of Cummings Lockwood in Stamford as a specialist in pensions, 401K's, health benefits and the like. She grosses $971.62 a week. She works from 9:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. in Stamford, where she has been working full time since 1988. After the birth of the first child, the plaintiff worked a day and a half a week on a consulting basis. Before the birth of her son, she had worked full time. After the birth of her second son, sh


Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes

Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes Date: 2000-02-22. Machine-draft public headnote: Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes


Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes

QDRO: ance on the 63 Fieldwood property from the date of this decree. The defendant shall hold his 50 percent interest in and to the LuDen Machine Tool Company, Inc. free and clear of all claims of the plaintiff. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by qualified domestic relations order one half of his interest in and to the pension the defendant is entitled to from his employment at CT Page 2330 Waterbury Farrell, which the court finds to be of a value of $19,000. The plaintiff shall retain all her right, title and interest in and to the plaintiff's stock in the May Company, of a value of $3,060, free and clear of all claims of the defe


Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes

pension: ndant shall hold his 50 percent interest in and to the LuDen Machine Tool Company, Inc. free and clear of all claims of the plaintiff. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by qualified domestic relations order one half of his interest in and to the pension the defendant is entitled to from his employment at CT Page 2330 Waterbury Farrell, which the court finds to be of a value of $19,000. The plaintiff shall retain all her right, title and interest in and to the plaintiff's stock in the May Company, of a value of $3,060, free and clear of all claims of the defendant. The defendant shall purchase or mainta


Eugenia Danes v. Lubomir Danes

domestic relations order: e 63 Fieldwood property from the date of this decree. The defendant shall hold his 50 percent interest in and to the LuDen Machine Tool Company, Inc. free and clear of all claims of the plaintiff. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by qualified domestic relations order one half of his interest in and to the pension the defendant is entitled to from his employment at CT Page 2330 Waterbury Farrell, which the court finds to be of a value of $19,000. The plaintiff shall retain all her right, title and interest in and to the plaintiff's stock in the May Company, of a value of $3,060, free and clear of all claims of the defe


Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier

Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier Date: 1997-01-07. Machine-draft public headnote: Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier


Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier

QDRO: e defendant, the plaintiff's remarriage or cohabitation as defined by statute, whichever event shall first occur. CT Page 607 PENSION 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to 50% of the defendant's pension as of December 31, 1996, to be secured by means of a QDRO. 2. The plaintiff claims to have withdrawn any amounts she would have been entitled to from her pension plan at Chevron. In the event there are any funds remaining, they shall be the sole property of the plaintiff. In the event the plaintiff is entitled to any pension benefits from Chevron (her former employer) said benefits shall be considered at the tim


Evelyn Forcier v. Gene Forcier

pension: to the term and amount of alimony ten years from date. Alimony shall terminate sooner on the death of the plaintiff, the death of the defendant, the plaintiff's remarriage or cohabitation as defined by statute, whichever event shall first occur. CT Page 607 PENSION 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to 50% of the defendant's pension as of December 31, 1996, to be secured by means of a QDRO. 2. The plaintiff claims to have withdrawn any amounts she would have been entitled to from her pension plan at Chevron. In the event there are any funds remaining, they shall be the sole property of the plaintiff. In the event


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.

Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha. Date: 2002-01-07. Machine-draft public headnote: Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to ERISA / defined contribution issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.

QDRO: aintiff shall be responsible for the preparation and cost of any said document. The court shall retain jurisdiction to resolve any disputes with respect to this transfer. To the extent necessary, the plaintiff husband shall provide and pay for the cost of any Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) in order to effectuate the provisions of this paragraph. 10. PERSONAL PROPERTY . The defendant shall have title to, and the right to possession of, all the contents of the marital home except for the plaintiff's personal belongings, weight lifting equipment, clothing, computer, grill, records, photo albums, pictures, books, and safe. Tools, lawn ma


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.

retirement benefits: property. The plaintiff shall accept any offer within five percent of the listing price. The plaintiff husband shall not, as of the date of this decision, withdraw any further monies on or from the second mortgage/home equity loan if such is available. 9. RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS . The defendant shall receive the two retirement accounts as set forth in the husband's financial affidavit. The plaintiff shall pay and execute any documentation necessary to accomplish this transfer, and the plaintiff shall be responsible for the preparation and cost of any said document. The court shall retain jurisdiction to resolve any disputes with r


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.

401(k): essure, is in good health. The plaintiff moved to the United States in January, 1980. In 1994, when the defendant moved here to join the plaintiff, she had virtually no belongings. At this time, the plaintiff owned some personal property, a car, had a small 401k account at Fleet Bank, and a small amount of debt. The defendant is 37 years of age and in good health. The plaintiff husband, prior to the defendant coming to America, received a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting at the University of Bridgeport and a Masters in Business Administration at the University of New Haven. The defendant wife earned a tea


Felix Oguagha v. Anthonia Oguagha.

domestic relations order: all be responsible for the preparation and cost of any said document. The court shall retain jurisdiction to resolve any disputes with respect to this transfer. To the extent necessary, the plaintiff husband shall provide and pay for the cost of any Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) in order to effectuate the provisions of this paragraph. 10. PERSONAL PROPERTY . The defendant shall have title to, and the right to possession of, all the contents of the marital home except for the plaintiff's personal belongings, weight lifting equipment, clothing, computer, grill, records, photo albums, pictures, books, and safe. Tools, lawn ma


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero Docket: 501418. The. Date: 1995-12-05. Machine-draft public headnote: Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

QDRO: ealth insurance shall be paid by her. 7. The defendant shall maintain $200,000 of insurance on his life for the benefit of the plaintiff for as long as the defendant is obligated to pay periodic alimony. 8. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), fifty (50%) percent of his qualified pension benefits from Saint Raphael's Hospital, valued as of December 31, 1995, which shall include any accrued interest or other accretions to the plan accumulated and to be credited to it for the calendar year 1995. In the interim, while the documentation is being processed for the transfer, the defendant CT Pa


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

retirement benefits: Fidelity Investment account number 4089968; All American contract number C999 AQA 14234403(b) tax sheltered annuity; Mutual Beneficial Life account; the balance of his Paul Revere Annuity Contract in the approximate amount of $61,000; his Lenox Hill Hospital retirement account; his bank accounts and automobile. 14. The plaintiff shall retain the contents of the marital CT Page 13526 residence except for the following items which shall be delivered or made available to the defendant within thirty days: the defendant's tools, (including a ten inch radial saw); his personal effects; his memorabilia; two picture frames; vase; prism


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

pension: of insurance on his life for the benefit of the plaintiff for as long as the defendant is obligated to pay periodic alimony. 8. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), fifty (50%) percent of his qualified pension benefits from Saint Raphael's Hospital, valued as of December 31, 1995, which shall include any accrued interest or other accretions to the plan accumulated and to be credited to it for the calendar year 1995. In the interim, while the documentation is being processed for the transfer, the defendant CT Page 13525 shall do nothing to impair said plan, or wit


Frances Reguero v. Wilfred Reguero

domestic relations order: rance shall be paid by her. 7. The defendant shall maintain $200,000 of insurance on his life for the benefit of the plaintiff for as long as the defendant is obligated to pay periodic alimony. 8. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), fifty (50%) percent of his qualified pension benefits from Saint Raphael's Hospital, valued as of December 31, 1995, which shall include any accrued interest or other accretions to the plan accumulated and to be credited to it for the calendar year 1995. In the interim, while the documentation is being processed for the transfer, the defendant CT Pa


Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.

Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson. Date: 2002-05-06. Machine-draft public headnote: Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.


Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.

QDRO: ed to be $31,111,31). Said transfers are to be pursuant to rollovers or other appropriate non-taxable transfer instrument. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife 50% interest in his union pension (represented to be $1,118.00 per month at age 65) pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order which he shall cause to be prepared. Until the transfers are accomplished within a reasonable period of time, the court shall retain jurisdiction. CHILDREN'S BANK ACCOUNTS AND STOCK PORTFOLIO The agreement of the parties dated May 2, 2002, on file, concerning the children's assets was reviewed by the court and is incorporated herein by reference. LIAB


Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.

pension: ld coins and silver bars 1,000.00 • Post Office bonds 5,000.00 • N.Y. Life Insurance CSV 14,000.00 • Post Office TDSP (wife) 24,501.37 • IA Annuity (husband) 34,986.37 • Local Annuity (husband) 31,111.31 • Union Pension ($1118.00/mo/age 65) — • 69 Corvette 3,000.00 • 77 C Gull Boat 500.00 • burial plots 2,500.00 • tax refund 5,500.00 TOTAL ASSETS $278,439.05 The Wife listed no liabilities on her financial affidavit but the Husband showed $13,100.00 in miscellaneous credit card debt. It would serve no useful purpose to chronicle t


Francine Robinson v. Donald Robinson.

domestic relations order: 31,111,31). Said transfers are to be pursuant to rollovers or other appropriate non-taxable transfer instrument. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife 50% interest in his union pension (represented to be $1,118.00 per month at age 65) pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order which he shall cause to be prepared. Until the transfers are accomplished within a reasonable period of time, the court shall retain jurisdiction. CHILDREN'S BANK ACCOUNTS AND STOCK PORTFOLIO The agreement of the parties dated May 2, 2002, on file, concerning the children's assets was reviewed by the court and is incorporated herein by reference. LIAB


Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca

Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca Date: 1995-09-26. Machine-draft public headnote: Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca


Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca

QDRO: n as of August 28, 1993. Any and all increase in the future vested value of this pension resulting from the ongoing and future employment of plaintiff since August 28, 1993, shall accrue to plaintiff. Plaintiff is ordered to execute and deliver to defendant a QDRO in the sum of $4,083.33. e. A credit of $4000 against the Employee Savings Plan of plaintiff estimated to be $12,500 as of September 19, 1995. This credit plus a further credit of $565 based on a recalculation of defendant's support arrearage is to be credited against the joint obligations of the parties as of August 28, 1993, arising from Visa and Discov


Francis Luca v. Cynthia Luca

pension: To the defendant: a. A 1990 Mitsubishi Eclipse automobile; b. All Dime Saving and Checking accounts in her name; c. All Department 56 collectible items presently in her possession; d. A one-third (1/3) interest in the present value of the plaintiff's pension with his employer, United Technologies, based on the value of this pension as of August 28, 1993. Any and all increase in the future vested value of this pension resulting from the ongoing and future employment of plaintiff since August 28, 1993, shall accrue to plaintiff. Plaintiff is ordered to execute and deliver to defendant a QDRO in the sum of $4,083.


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino

Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino Date: 1990-11-07. Machine-draft public headnote: Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino

QDRO: expenses of the defendant. 5. The defendant wife is hereby awarded the maximum survivor annuity benefit available under the husband's Sargent retirement benefits. Defendant's counsel shall inform the plan administrator of the Court's award, and prepare any Qualified Domestic Relations Order which may be necessary. The court retains jurisdiction over the same. CT Page 3814 6. The personal property in the marital home is awarded to the defendant. By the Court: Elaine Gordon, Judge.


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino

retirement benefits: d by law. Each party shall be responsible for one half the non-insured non-reimbursed psychiatric and psychological expenses of the defendant. 5. The defendant wife is hereby awarded the maximum survivor annuity benefit available under the husband's Sargent retirement benefits. Defendant's counsel shall inform the plan administrator of the Court's award, and prepare any Qualified Domestic Relations Order which may be necessary. The court retains jurisdiction over the same. CT Page 3814 6. The personal property in the marital home is awarded to the defendant. By the Court: Elaine Gordon, Judge.


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino

domestic relations order: of the defendant. 5. The defendant wife is hereby awarded the maximum survivor annuity benefit available under the husband's Sargent retirement benefits. Defendant's counsel shall inform the plan administrator of the Court's award, and prepare any Qualified Domestic Relations Order which may be necessary. The court retains jurisdiction over the same. CT Page 3814 6. The personal property in the marital home is awarded to the defendant. By the Court: Elaine Gordon, Judge.


Frederick K. Depino v. Linda Depino

survivor benefits: are available through his employment for the full period allowed by law. Each party shall be responsible for one half the non-insured non-reimbursed psychiatric and psychological expenses of the defendant. 5. The defendant wife is hereby awarded the maximum survivor annuity benefit available under the husband's Sargent retirement benefits. Defendant's counsel shall inform the plan administrator of the Court's award, and prepare any Qualified Domestic Relations Order which may be necessary. The court retains jurisdiction over the same. CT Page 3814 6. The personal property in the marital home is awarded to the defendant. B


Fulgium v. Fulgium

Fulgium v. Fulgium Citation: 240 Md. App. 269. Extracted reporter citation: 240 Md. App. 269. Docket: CAD16-32242 REPORTED. Date: 2019-02-27. Machine-draft public headnote: Fulgium v. Fulgium is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Fulgium v. Fulgium

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 1/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Fulgium v. Fulgium

retirement benefits: from a divorce action between Amy Fulgium, appellant, and Christopher Fulgium, appellee. On July 31, 2017, the Circuit Court for Prince George's County issued a Judgment of Absolute Divorce and a Constituted Pension Order relating to Mr. Fulgium's military retirement benefits. On appeal, Ms. Fulgium challenges only the award of military retirement benefits. In that regard, she presents five questions for this Court's review,1 which we have consolidated and rephrased, as follows: 1. Did the circuit court err in incorrectly calculating Ms. Fulgium's marital share of Mr. Fulgium's military pension? 1 Ms. Fulgium presents


Fulgium v. Fulgium

pension: Amy Fulgium v. Christopher Fulgium, No. 1753, September Term, 2017 UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSES' PROTECTION ACT; MARITAL SHARE OF A MILITARY PENSION Military pensions may be considered divisible marital property "[s]ubject to the limitations" of 10 U.S.C. § 1408. These limitations include that only "disposable retired pay" may be considered marital property, and the benefit is frozen at the time of divorce, as opposed to the time of retirement. Thus, under § 1408(a)(4), when there is a final decree of


Fulgium v. Fulgium

valuation/division: . Fulgium's retired base pay is $56,536.72 following 17 years, 19 [sic] months of credible service. That, to date, Mr. Fulgium's annual payout in accordance with that 215 months of service is at an annual rate of $25,300.18. [Ms.] Fulgium should be awarded marital portion of pension as had accrued on the date of this order using that formula. In response to the circuit court's oral ruling, counsel for Ms. Fulgium asked the court to clarify whether it awarded Ms. Fulgium 50% of Mr. Fulgium's disposable military pay or 15%. The following colloquy between the court and counsel for Ms. Fulgium ensued: THE COURT: Fifteen.


Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus

Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus Date: 2000-02-28. Machine-draft public headnote: Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus

QDRO: lights j. miscellaneous tools and drill press k. his tapes and guns PENSION PLANS 1. The defendant shall assign to the plaintiff fifty percent (50%) of his Qualified pension plan with Allied Signal, valued as of the date of dissolution, by means of a QDRO. 2. The defendant shall bear the cost of the preparation of the QDRO which shall be drafted within 30 days hereof. The court shall retain jurisdiction over any disputes over the QDRO. PROPERTY SETTLEMENT 1. By way of a lump sum property settlement, the plaintiff shall be entitled to fifty percent (50%) of the following remaining assets and deferred co


Gail Rimkus v. Alfred Rimkus

pension: ely $784 per week. The defendant does extensive out of the country travel for his company at which time the company pays for all his living and travel expenses. The marriage went downhill over the past ten years. The defendant was able to amass considerable pension accounts and mutual funds accounts totaling in excess of $200,000. The parties own their home at 300 Housatonic Drive, Milford and have agreed that the equity in this home is $133,900. The plaintiff filed bankruptcy in April 1999 and discharged substantial credit card debt. No useful purpose would be served by a review of the evidence presented in this ma


Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen

Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen Date: 1998-03-26. Machine-draft public headnote: Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 2/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen

QDRO: tally responsible for the rent and/or mortgage, upkeep maintenance and he's providing the home for the kids. CT Page 9721 Regarding the IRA accounts. The IRA accounts are divided 60 percent to Mr. Sagen, 40 percent to Ms. Sagen. Any documents, including the qualified domestic relations order or directions to a controlling administrator or bank shall be prepared by counsel for Mr. Sagen and presented to the Court for signature. The attorney for the minor child is awarded counsel fees in accordance with the State schedule and he can present the forms, the appropriate forms, to me and I will sign them for forwarding to the State. Each of the parti


Gary Sagen v. Carolyn Sagen

domestic relations order: onsible for the rent and/or mortgage, upkeep maintenance and he's providing the home for the kids. CT Page 9721 Regarding the IRA accounts. The IRA accounts are divided 60 percent to Mr. Sagen, 40 percent to Ms. Sagen. Any documents, including the qualified domestic relations order or directions to a controlling administrator or bank shall be prepared by counsel for Mr. Sagen and presented to the Court for signature. The attorney for the minor child is awarded counsel fees in accordance with the State schedule and he can present the forms, the appropriate forms, to me and I will sign them for forwarding to the State. Each of the parti


Gary Young v. Colleen Young

Gary Young v. Colleen Young Date: 1996-11-07. Machine-draft public headnote: Gary Young v. Colleen Young is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gary Young v. Colleen Young


Gary Young v. Colleen Young

QDRO: ff's name are awarded to the plaintiff. 8. All bank accounts in the defendant's name are awarded to the defendant. 9. The two deferred compensation plans shown on the defendant's financial affidavit are ordered to be divided equally between the parties by QDRO. 10. The three deferred compensation plans on the plaintiff's financial affidavit, namely, the VFTC money purchase pension plan, the VFTC profit sharing retirement plan, and the VFTC IRA are ordered to be divided equally between the parties by QDRO. 11. All of the liabilities shown on the supplemental page 2 of the defendant's financial affidavit, excep


Gary Young v. Colleen Young

retirement benefits: Some of the furniture was paid for in cash and some by credit card. The plaintiff has various deferred compensation plans. The following represents the correct balances on those plans: 1. VFTC money purchased pension $111,645.55; 2. VFTC profit-sharing retirement plan $81,821.54; and 3. VFTC IRA $9,565.22. The deferred compensation plan shown with VFTC is with Vanguard Fiduciary Trust. The plaintiff claims that he has overpaid the defendant $1000 since a pendente lite order was entered and seeks a credit for that amount. The plaintiff's financial affidavit shows gross weekly income of $3538.15 and a net weekly in


Gary Young v. Colleen Young

pension: ince the date he vacated the family residence. Some of the furniture was paid for in cash and some by credit card. The plaintiff has various deferred compensation plans. The following represents the correct balances on those plans: 1. VFTC money purchased pension $111,645.55; 2. VFTC profit-sharing retirement plan $81,821.54; and 3. VFTC IRA $9,565.22. The deferred compensation plan shown with VFTC is with Vanguard Fiduciary Trust. The plaintiff claims that he has overpaid the defendant $1000 since a pendente lite order was entered and seeks a credit for that amount. The plaintiff's financial affidavit sho


Gary Young v. Colleen Young

valuation/division: e present dissolution action, he gave the defendant $3000 to apply towards her legal fees. The court has considered the provision of § 46b-82 regarding the issues of alimony, and has considered the provision of § 46b-81 (c) regarding the issues of property division, and has considered the provision of § 46b-56 and § 46b-56a regarding the issues of custody and joint custody and visitation, and has considered the provision of § 46b-84 and the child support guidelines regarding the issue of support, and has considered the provision of § 46b-62 regarding the issue of attorney fees. The court enters the


Gayle E. Crandall v. Charles G. Crandall. Date: 1992-06-16. Machine-draft public headnote: Gayle E. Crandall v. Charles G. Crandall. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


QDRO: entitled to credit or reimbursement of any sums so paid. The plaintiff shall be entitled to and is hereby awarded $390. per month of the defendant's pension and the defendant shall prepare and execute the necessary documents so that this order may become a qualified domestic relations order and vest that portion of the pension with the plaintiff wife. G. To the extent that it is necessary to withdraw money from the SNET Management Savings Plan ($20,000) and to the extent that capital gains tax liability may arise from the transfer of the shares of stock in SNET, the plaintiff shall be liable for 1/2 the income tax liability due to the Federa


pension: 80. e. Two IRA accounts — one for each party totaling $5,468. f. 1986 Nissan Stanza automobile value approximately $5,000. g. 1984 Subaru GL Wagon value approximately $1,000. h. A parcel of land at Port Charlotte, Florida value $3,000. i. SNET Pension Plan — present value undetermined. 11. The parties have stipulated and agreed to joint custody of the two minor children with their primary residence to be with the defendant father and the plaintiff mother to have liberal rights of visitation. The defendant father has waived any claim to child support by the plaintiff mother and the plaintiff has w


401(k): mately $9,500 and would be far in excess of his tax liability. It should be noted that in the last three years the parties have received tax refunds of $1,500 to $1,700. In addition the defendant has $85. per week taken out of his pay on a voluntary basis for 401K Plan. His actual net pay is somewhere between $600 and $700. per week. 10. The parties have a number of assets which are as follows: a. The jointly owned marital residence which the parties stipulated has a value of $220,000. and is subject to a mortgage of $37,000. leaving equity of $183,000. b. SNET Management Savings Plan in the amount of $107,961.


domestic relations order: to credit or reimbursement of any sums so paid. The plaintiff shall be entitled to and is hereby awarded $390. per month of the defendant's pension and the defendant shall prepare and execute the necessary documents so that this order may become a qualified domestic relations order and vest that portion of the pension with the plaintiff wife. G. To the extent that it is necessary to withdraw money from the SNET Management Savings Plan ($20,000) and to the extent that capital gains tax liability may arise from the transfer of the shares of stock in SNET, the plaintiff shall be liable for 1/2 the income tax liability due to the Federa


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato. Date: 2000-06-23. Machine-draft public headnote: Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

QDRO: nterest at 6% per annum, said interest and principal payable on or before July 1, 2001. Said note is to be secured by a mortgage on said property, which mortgage shall contain the usual covenants. 4. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order $32,500.00 from her Agway Thrift Savings and Investment Plan by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or by other means to avoid any tax to either party. Further, the defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff any interest she may have in a Metropolitan Life Insurance policy, which presently has a cash value of approximately $3,500.00. If the defenda


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

retirement benefits: property is subject to liens of $13,000.00. During the marriage the plaintiff received an undivided one-half interest in 16 West Street, Westerly, Rhode Island from his mother. Presently said one-half interest is valued at $67,500.00. The plaintiff has a retirement plan at Electric Boat valued presently at $9,368.00, a Connecticut Community Credit Union checking account of $1,000.00 and a 1987 Toyota Camry valued at $1,000.00. The defendant has three credit union accounts totaling $1,926.00; an CT Page 7679 Agway Thrift Plan valued at $50,652.00; an IRA valued at $1,800.00 and a 2000 Chevrolet with no value because of a


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

pension: the sum of $62,500.00 with said interest and payment date as is provided for in said paragraph 3. 5. Each party shall retain the IRA presently in their individual names. 6. The plaintiff shall keep, free of any claim from the defendant, his Electric Boat pension. CT Page 7680 7. The defendant shall keep, free of any claim by the plaintiff, the credit union accounts, and the Connecticut Community Credit Union Checking account listed on her financial affidavit. 8. Each party shall keep, as their own, the automobile listed on their respective financial affidavits subject to any loans thereon and hold the other har


Gene Delicato v. Barbara Delicato.

domestic relations order: 6% per annum, said interest and principal payable on or before July 1, 2001. Said note is to be secured by a mortgage on said property, which mortgage shall contain the usual covenants. 4. The defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order $32,500.00 from her Agway Thrift Savings and Investment Plan by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or by other means to avoid any tax to either party. Further, the defendant shall transfer to the plaintiff any interest she may have in a Metropolitan Life Insurance policy, which presently has a cash value of approximately $3,500.00. If the defenda


Gerving v. Gerving

Gerving v. Gerving Citation: 2020 ND 116. Extracted reporter citation: 2020 ND 116. Docket: 20190253. Date: 2020-06-02. Machine-draft public headnote: Gerving v. Gerving is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to family-law retirement/property division context. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gerving v. Gerving

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 1/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Gerving v. Gerving

retirement benefits: ceeds. Janet is receiving $96,000 in payments over the next sixteen (16) years and approximately $67,500 more in retirement, amounting to an award of $163,500 to offset the farming operation award to Ben. Each party was awarded their personal possessions, retirement accounts, and individual credit card debt. [¶11] This was a long-term marriage, which produced two children, and there was evidence both parties contributed to the marriage and the farming operation. Evidence established both parties have full time jobs off the farm and both parties have worked on and contributed to the farming operation. Evidence established Ben


Gerving v. Gerving

valuation/division: judgment incorporating the terms of the agreement. [¶4] In May 2019, a bench trial was held on the remaining issues, including distribution of the marital estate and spousal support. The district court found the length of the marriage would support an equal property division, but other factors had to be weighed, including that Ben Gerving acquired the real property and farm prior to the marriage, that he lived and worked on the farm his entire life, and that he did most of the work on the farm. The court concluded Ben Gerving should be awarded the family farm, homestead, equipment, animals, and the accompanying debt. The court


Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno

Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno Date: 1999-02-02. Machine-draft public headnote: Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno


Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno

QDRO: tiff. 5) The plaintiff shall be entitled to all proceeds from his workmen's compensation claim. CT Page 1042 PENSION SAVINGS 1) The defendant shall be entitled to 50% of the plaintiff's pension valued as of this date, which shall be secured by means of a QDRO. The plaintiff shall cooperate in executing the proper documents to effectuate the QDRO. 2) The plaintiff shall be entitled to his 401(k) plan. DEBTS 1) The plaintiff shall be responsible for the balance of the debt owed to the Yale New Haven Hospital. 2) Each party shall be responsible for one-half of the orthodontia bill incurred by the minor child


Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno

pension: ing equipment. 4) The plaintiff shall be entitled to whatever extra pots and pans, linens and dishware the defendant chooses to give to the plaintiff. 5) The plaintiff shall be entitled to all proceeds from his workmen's compensation claim. CT Page 1042 PENSION SAVINGS 1) The defendant shall be entitled to 50% of the plaintiff's pension valued as of this date, which shall be secured by means of a QDRO. The plaintiff shall cooperate in executing the proper documents to effectuate the QDRO. 2) The plaintiff shall be entitled to his 401(k) plan. DEBTS 1) The plaintiff shall be responsible for the balance of the


Gregg Frosceno v. Lynn Frosceno

401(k): efendant shall be entitled to 50% of the plaintiff's pension valued as of this date, which shall be secured by means of a QDRO. The plaintiff shall cooperate in executing the proper documents to effectuate the QDRO. 2) The plaintiff shall be entitled to his 401(k) plan. DEBTS 1) The plaintiff shall be responsible for the balance of the debt owed to the Yale New Haven Hospital. 2) Each party shall be responsible for one-half of the orthodontia bill incurred by the minor children. 3) Each party shall be responsible for one half of the balance due on the ATT Visa Card and the indebtedness owed to the Fleet Bank.


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter

Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter Date: 1996-10-10. Machine-draft public headnote: Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter

QDRO: y for the child's education, and such expenditures shall be agreed upon in writing by both parties. 12. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant 50% of the plaintiff's pension at Pitney Bowes valued as of this date. Such transfer shall be executed by a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff's attorney shall be responsible for preparing such order. The court retains jurisdiction to effectuate such transfer. 13. If any deficiencies should be determined in respect of any joint income tax return previously filed by the parties, each party shall bear his or her share of any additional tax, including interest and penalties, attribut


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter

pension: he minor child, and $2,400 in Series E savings bonds. These funds shall be used solely for the child's education, and such expenditures shall be agreed upon in writing by both parties. 12. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant 50% of the plaintiff's pension at Pitney Bowes valued as of this date. Such transfer shall be executed by a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff's attorney shall be responsible for preparing such order. The court retains jurisdiction to effectuate such transfer. 13. If any deficiencies should be determined in respect of any joint income tax return previously filed by the p


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter

401(k): e exception of the joint People's Bank checking account which is awarded to the plaintiff to be used for payment of family expenses for the month of October, 1996. The remaining property includes the following assets: a. Combustion Credit Union Account b. 401 K — Plaintiff c. Combustion IRA — Plaintiff d. Fidelity IRA — Plaintiff e. Pitney Bowes Stock f. Savings Bonds — Series E g. People's Money Market h. People's CD CT Page 7961 i. 401 K — Defendant j. Combustion IRA — Defendant k. Fidelity IRA — Defendant The present value of these assets is approxim


Gregory Smalter v. Nancy Smalter

domestic relations order: child's education, and such expenditures shall be agreed upon in writing by both parties. 12. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant 50% of the plaintiff's pension at Pitney Bowes valued as of this date. Such transfer shall be executed by a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff's attorney shall be responsible for preparing such order. The court retains jurisdiction to effectuate such transfer. 13. If any deficiencies should be determined in respect of any joint income tax return previously filed by the parties, each party shall bear his or her share of any additional tax, including interest and penalties, attribut


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran Date: 1998-05-27. Machine-draft public headnote: Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to ERISA / defined contribution issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

QDRO: e defendant, and a determination as to whether that arrearage, if any, should be paid in full or how that arrearage, if any, should be discharged. 8. The defendant is awarded $7000 from the plaintiff's 401K plan. It is to be transferred to her by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The defendant is to prepare the order. The court retains jurisdiction over any disputes that may arise involving the language to be used. The plaintiff is solely responsible for any outstanding loan against his 401K plan, and is to hold the defendant harmless. 9. During the course of the trial, there was evidence that the defendant had paid various expen


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

retirement benefits: spending money in Vietnam. The other $9000 deposited into a checking account. Some of that $9000 was used towards college expenses for both children. The parties are in dispute as to whether the defendant withdrew approximately $15,000 from the plaintiff's retirement plan in 1985 and retained the money. From the evidence presented, the court finds that the defendant did not withdraw that money. As of April 7, 1998, the plaintiff was in arrears in the amount of $6668.84 in his pendente lite payments to the defendant. That amount is subject to adjustments based on the plaintiff's employer withholding money from his pay. Th


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

401(k): e. From the evidence presented, the court finds that the plaintiff is responsible for the breakdown of the marriage. The plaintiff is forty-six years old. The plaintiff has been to Vietnam on three separate occasions since the parties married. He used his 401K funds, as well as his VISA account, as well as obtaining loans from friends to finance the trips. His first trip was in 1990 where he spent approximately $2000 to purchase a home and furniture for his parents. In January of 1998, he went to Vietnam with a female friend. She has stayed overnight on occasions at his apartment. The plaintiff is presently emp


Hai Tran v. Binhminh Tran

domestic relations order: t, and a determination as to whether that arrearage, if any, should be paid in full or how that arrearage, if any, should be discharged. 8. The defendant is awarded $7000 from the plaintiff's 401K plan. It is to be transferred to her by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The defendant is to prepare the order. The court retains jurisdiction over any disputes that may arise involving the language to be used. The plaintiff is solely responsible for any outstanding loan against his 401K plan, and is to hold the defendant harmless. 9. During the course of the trial, there was evidence that the defendant had paid various expen


Hannah M. Soboleski v. John A. Soboleski, Jr. Date: 1994-06-17. Machine-draft public headnote: Hannah M. Soboleski v. John A. Soboleski, Jr. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


QDRO: be responsible for capital improvements or replacements. The husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $25,000 on August 1, 1996 or upon her vacating the premises, whichever event is the latest to occur. 6. The husband shall assign to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, 50 percent of his pension plan trust valued as of one day prior to his borrowing $13,000 from said plan. Said QDRO shall provide the CT Page 6749 wife a joint and survivor annuity benefit. 7. The husband shall continue to maintain the life insurance policy or policies in existence as of March 29, 1994, naming the children as irrevocable beneficiaries for


pension: s. The husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $25,000 on August 1, 1996 or upon her vacating the premises, whichever event is the latest to occur. 6. The husband shall assign to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, 50 percent of his pension plan trust valued as of one day prior to his borrowing $13,000 from said plan. Said QDRO shall provide the CT Page 6749 wife a joint and survivor annuity benefit. 7. The husband shall continue to maintain the life insurance policy or policies in existence as of March 29, 1994, naming the children as irrevocable beneficiaries for so long as he is obligated


domestic relations order: ible for capital improvements or replacements. The husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $25,000 on August 1, 1996 or upon her vacating the premises, whichever event is the latest to occur. 6. The husband shall assign to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, 50 percent of his pension plan trust valued as of one day prior to his borrowing $13,000 from said plan. Said QDRO shall provide the CT Page 6749 wife a joint and survivor annuity benefit. 7. The husband shall continue to maintain the life insurance policy or policies in existence as of March 29, 1994, naming the children as irrevocable beneficiaries for


survivor benefits: ccur. 6. The husband shall assign to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, 50 percent of his pension plan trust valued as of one day prior to his borrowing $13,000 from said plan. Said QDRO shall provide the CT Page 6749 wife a joint and survivor annuity benefit. 7. The husband shall continue to maintain the life insurance policy or policies in existence as of March 29, 1994, naming the children as irrevocable beneficiaries for so long as he is obligated to pay child support. 8. The husband shall take the two younger children as exemptions for federal and/or state income tax purposes. 9. The parties


Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso

Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso Date: 1998-02-03. Machine-draft public headnote: Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso


Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso

QDRO: e defendant, her remarriage or cohabitation as defined by statute. SNET SAVINGS PLAN The plaintiff shall transfer and assign to the defendant one-half of his SNET savings plan valued as of September 30, 1996. Said transfer to be accomplished by means of a QDRO. The court shall retain jurisdiction over any disputes arising as to this CT Page 1351 transfer. It is the court's intention that the defendant receive one-half of this savings at little or no tax consequences to the defendant as well as to the plaintiff. PENSION PLAN The plaintiff shall be entitled to the benefits of his pension plan and the defendant


Harry C. Geloso v. Anna T. Geloso

pension: reasonably good health. He has worked close to 20 years with SNET and presently earns approximately $54,600 gross per year. The parties own their home with an equity of approximately $89,000. The husband has a SNET Savings Plan of approximately $100,000; a pension of approximately $92,000; and a lot in Florida valued at between $3,500 and $5,000. There are substantial credit card debts. Since the summer of 1996, the plaintiff has been keeping company with another woman which has led to the breakdown of the marital relationship. Although the plaintiff husband initiated the dissolution action, he has not vacated the


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.

Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt. Date: 2000-04-18. Machine-draft public headnote: Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.

QDRO: f one-half the difference. The Wife is awarded one-half of the monthly benefit from the Husband's UTC Pension Plan, including survivors benefits, earned CT Page 4562 between the date of marriage and the date of dissolution. Said award is to be pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order to be prepared by Barry Kaplan at an expense to be equally shared. Counsel for both parties are to certify their approval of the QDRO before submitting it to the court for approval. The court will reserve jurisdiction to hear any disputes concerning this order. LIABILITIES Each party shall be solely responsible for the liabilities shown on their respect


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.

pension: lifornia which he sold and netted $24,264.00, a Corvette automobile with a value of $8,000.00, a Volkswagen automobile with a value of $2,500.00, a ski boat with a value of $9,500.00, savings of $7,933.00, and furniture of $6,000.00. He also had accumulated a pension from 10 years of employment at Sikorsky. A pension expert testified that at the time of marriage the benefit to which he was entitled was $295.87 per month at age 65. The present monthly benefit at age 65 is $1,647.41. The Husband also had various obligations to his first Wife which were paid off during the course of the marriage. There was much testimony


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.

401(k): and should have no difficulty being productive and self supporting in future years. The orders contained herein are based upon his current income of $1,422.00 per week. At the time of the marriage, the Wife claimed to have $6,000 in savings, $3,400.00 in a 401k, jewelry, and a car with a $10,000 fair market value. However, it should be noted that during the course of the marriage the parties were recipients of generous cash and personal property gifts from the Wife's family on an annual basis. Such assistance from her family continues for the Wife. The Husband claimed, and had documentary evidence to substantiat


Holly M. Hargitt v. Terry A. Hargitt.

domestic relations order: the difference. The Wife is awarded one-half of the monthly benefit from the Husband's UTC Pension Plan, including survivors benefits, earned CT Page 4562 between the date of marriage and the date of dissolution. Said award is to be pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order to be prepared by Barry Kaplan at an expense to be equally shared. Counsel for both parties are to certify their approval of the QDRO before submitting it to the court for approval. The court will reserve jurisdiction to hear any disputes concerning this order. LIABILITIES Each party shall be solely responsible for the liabilities shown on their respect


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger Date: 1999-04-01. Machine-draft public headnote: Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

QDRO: rder to partially or wholly liquidate this CT Page 4958 amount, he alone will bear the costs of sale. Using the date of memorandum as evaluation date, the retirement plans and/or IRAs of the parties shall be distributed equally to them by way of appropriate qualified domestic relations order or other orders may be required to effect this distribution. The assets included in this distribution plan include the Prudential plan, the Prudential IRA and the John Alden account as noted on the plaintiff's financial affidavit and the Caldor profit sharing plan and any benefits accruing from the retirement benefit plan of R.R. Donnelly Sons Company as sh


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

retirement benefits: e court is taking into consideration that in the event the plaintiff eventually sells the property in order to partially or wholly liquidate this CT Page 4958 amount, he alone will bear the costs of sale. Using the date of memorandum as evaluation date, the retirement plans and/or IRAs of the parties shall be distributed equally to them by way of appropriate qualified domestic relations order or other orders may be required to effect this distribution. The assets included in this distribution plan include the Prudential plan, the Prudential IRA and the John Alden account as noted on the plaintiff's financial affidavit and the


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

domestic relations order: rtially or wholly liquidate this CT Page 4958 amount, he alone will bear the costs of sale. Using the date of memorandum as evaluation date, the retirement plans and/or IRAs of the parties shall be distributed equally to them by way of appropriate qualified domestic relations order or other orders may be required to effect this distribution. The assets included in this distribution plan include the Prudential plan, the Prudential IRA and the John Alden account as noted on the plaintiff's financial affidavit and the Caldor profit sharing plan and any benefits accruing from the retirement benefit plan of R.R. Donnelly Sons Company as sh


Howard J. Alger v. Sara K. Alger

valuation/division: the gross 50%, as the court is taking into consideration that in the event the plaintiff eventually sells the property in order to partially or wholly liquidate this CT Page 4958 amount, he alone will bear the costs of sale. Using the date of memorandum as evaluation date, the retirement plans and/or IRAs of the parties shall be distributed equally to them by way of appropriate qualified domestic relations order or other orders may be required to effect this distribution. The assets included in this distribution plan include the Prudential plan, the Prudential IRA and the John Alden account as noted on the plaintiff's financ


In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus

In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus Citation: 265 P.3d 253. Extracted reporter citation: 265 P.3d 253. Docket: of psychological tests. All the results were. Date: 2011-12-29. Machine-draft public headnote: In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 1/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


In Re RICHARD SHAPUTIS on Habeas Corpus

pension: usiness, and for the 13 years preceding the murder was employed by Bechtel Corporation as a supervisor. F. The 2009 Hearing At the latest hearing in August 2009, petitioner was 72 years old. It was noted that he had a comfortable private income from a union pension, Social Security, and some savings. He planned to live with his wife in a retirement community. Petitioner suffers from high blood pressure and has had three heart attacks, the most recent in 2003. He was recovering from shoulder surgery at the time of the hearing. As noted, petitioner had declined to be interviewed by the psychologist appointed by CDCR to


In Re the MARRIAGE OF Gloria Bonita BOYER and Larry Charles Boyer. Upon the Petition of Gloria Bonita Boyer, Appellee, and Concerning Larry Charles Boyer, Appellant Citation: 538 N.W.2d 293. Extracted reporter citation: 538 N.W.2d 293. Docket: 94-213. Supreme. Date: 1995-09-20. Machine-draft public headnote: In Re the MARRIAGE OF Gloria Bonita BOYER and Larry Charles Boyer. Upon the Petition of Gloria Bonita Boyer, Appellee, and Concerning Larry Charles Boyer, Appellant is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to family-law retirement/property division context. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 1/5, retirement-division score 2/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


opening text: 538 N.W.2d 293 (1995) In re the MARRIAGE OF Gloria Bonita BOYER and Larry Charles Boyer. Upon the Petition of Gloria Bonita Boyer, Appellee, And Concerning Larry Charles Boyer, Appellant. No. 94-213. Supreme Court of Iowa. September 20, 1995. Leslie Babich of Babich, McConnell & Renzo, P.C., Des Moines, for appellant. Thomas D. Hanson and Brenda K. O'Neil of Hanson, Bjork & Russell, Des Moines, for appellee. Considered by McGIVERIN, C.J., and HARRIS, NEUMAN, ANDREASEN, and TERNUS, JJ. HARRIS, Justice. We granted further review in this dissolution of marriage case in order to resolve a question on which the court of appeals is divided. Under federal legislation, social se


In Re the Marriage of JULIE R. and TIMOTHY P. GREEN. JULIE R. GREEN, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY P. GREEN, Respondent Citation: 56 Cal. 4th 1130. Extracted reporter citation: 56 Cal. 4th 1130. Docket: S203561 Date. Date: 2013-06-24. Machine-draft public headnote: In Re the Marriage of JULIE R. and TIMOTHY P. GREEN. JULIE R. GREEN, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY P. GREEN, Respondent is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


retirement benefits: re the Marriage of JULIE R. GREEN) and TIMOTHY P. GREEN. ) ) JULIE R. GREEN, ) ) Appellant, ) ) S203561 v. ) ) Ct.App. 1/4 A129436 TIMOTHY P. GREEN, ) ) Contra Costa County Respondent. ) Super. Ct. No. D0801292 ____________________________________) Retirement benefits attributable to service rendered during a marriage are community property. In this case, the husband, a firefighter, has retirement benefits that are part community property and part his own separate property. During the time of the marriage, he exercised his right to purchase four years‟ worth of additional retirement credit for his premarital military se


pension: r dissolution of the marriage in March 2008. The parties disputed whether to characterize husband‟s military service credit as separate or community property. After a trial, the trial court ordered that the military service credit portion of husband‟s CalPERS pension be awarded to him as his separate property. The court also ordered husband to pay wife $6,699.54, representing half of the installment payments made with community funds toward the military service credit, plus interest at the rate of 6 percent. Wife appealed, challenging the characterization of the military service credit as husband‟s separate property. T


valuation/division: EN, ) ) Appellant, ) ) S203561 v. ) ) Ct.App. 1/4 A129436 TIMOTHY P. GREEN, ) ) Contra Costa County Respondent. ) Super. Ct. No. D0801292 ____________________________________) Retirement benefits attributable to service rendered during a marriage are community property. In this case, the husband, a firefighter, has retirement benefits that are part community property and part his own separate property. During the time of the marriage, he exercised his right to purchase four years‟ worth of additional retirement credit for his premarital military service. He had to pay to obtain this additional credit, which he elected to


In Re the Marriage of RAUL and INGRID OBRECHT. RAUL OBRECHT, Appellant, v. INGRID OBRECHT, Respondent Citation: 245 Cal. App. 4th 1. Extracted reporter citation: 245 Cal. App. 4th 1. Date: 2016-02-24. Machine-draft public headnote: In Re the Marriage of RAUL and INGRID OBRECHT. RAUL OBRECHT, Appellant, v. INGRID OBRECHT, Respondent is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


QDRO: igned a judgment for dissolution, which was filed on January 23, 2014. The judgment (1) ordered Raul to pay spousal support in the amount of $1,573 per month beginning November 7, 2012; (2) entered an earnings assignment order; (3) ordered Ingrid to prepare a qualified domestic relations order dividing Raul's pension; (4) ordered Raul to pay $11,516 plus interest in delinquent spousal support; and (5) confirmed the award of attorney fees made by the court on January 8, 2013. Raul filed a timely notice of appeal on March 21, 2014. DISCUSSION I. Personal Jurisdiction A. General Appearance Raul maintains that there was no basis for the trial cou


pension: n January 23, 2014. The judgment (1) ordered Raul to pay spousal support in the amount of $1,573 per month beginning November 7, 2012; (2) entered an earnings assignment order; (3) ordered Ingrid to prepare a qualified domestic relations order dividing Raul's pension; (4) ordered Raul to pay $11,516 plus interest in delinquent spousal support; and (5) confirmed the award of attorney fees made by the court on January 8, 2013. Raul filed a timely notice of appeal on March 21, 2014. DISCUSSION I. Personal Jurisdiction A. General Appearance Raul maintains that there was no basis for the trial court's exercise of persona


domestic relations order: dgment for dissolution, which was filed on January 23, 2014. The judgment (1) ordered Raul to pay spousal support in the amount of $1,573 per month beginning November 7, 2012; (2) entered an earnings assignment order; (3) ordered Ingrid to prepare a qualified domestic relations order dividing Raul's pension; (4) ordered Raul to pay $11,516 plus interest in delinquent spousal support; and (5) confirmed the award of attorney fees made by the court on January 8, 2013. Raul filed a timely notice of appeal on March 21, 2014. DISCUSSION I. Personal Jurisdiction A. General Appearance Raul maintains that there was no basis for the trial cou


In Re the MARRIAGE OF Sandi I. HANSEN and Andrew J. Hansen Upon the Petition of Sandi I. Hansen, Petitioner-Appellee, and Concerning Andrew J. Hansen, Respondent-Appellant Citation: 886 N.W.2d 868. Extracted reporter citation: 886 N.W.2d 868. Docket: 15-1825. Date: 2016-07-27. Machine-draft public headnote: In Re the MARRIAGE OF Sandi I. HANSEN and Andrew J. Hansen Upon the Petition of Sandi I. Hansen, Petitioner-Appellee, and Concerning Andrew J. Hansen, Respondent-Appellant is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


pension: ntends the district court inequitably divided the parties' assets and liabilities. He asserts the court erred in (1) failing to consider Andy's parents' $80,000 contribution to the family home; (2) failing to address the Chevy Traverse; (3) dividing Andy's pension; and (4) ordering Andy to pay an equalization payment to Sandi in the amount of $13,590.60. "[O]ur courts equitably divide all of the property owned by the parties at the time of divorce except inherited property and gifts received by one spouse." In re Marriage of Keener, 728 N.W.2d 188, 193 (Iowa 2007). However, "Iowa courts do not require an equal


valuation/division: e earning capacity of each party; the desirability of awarding the family home to the party having custody of the children; the amount and duration of support payments; other economic circumstances; potential tax consequences; any written agreement concerning property division; an antenuptial agreement; and other relevant factors. Iowa Code § 598.21(5). 5 procedural errors arise that may require possession to be returned to one of the parties, or if after the sale, the parties are entitled to a surplus or have a deficiency to pay. However, we decline to speculate whether a surplus or deficiency may exist after the vehicle'


Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton

Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton Date: 1991-12-31. Machine-draft public headnote: Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton

QDRO: ht U.S. Savings Bonds in the amount of $850.00, as well as the United Technology savings plan in the amount of $71,231.49. 7) The defendant is ordered to transfer to the plaintiff one-half of the present value of his Pratt Whitney pension benefits through a qualified domestic relations order. The plaintiff is ordered to transfer to the defendant one-half of the present value of her Caldor's pension benefits through a qualified domestic relations order. This order regarding both pension benefits is intended to be a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) as the term is used in the Retirement Equity Act of 1984. The court retains jurisdiction o


Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton

pension: d no lien. The plaintiff owns jewelry with a value of $2,000.00. she has a credit union account with a balance of $165.48, a City, savings account with a balance of $10,268.00, and a PTW credit union account with a balance of $1,200.00. The plaintiff also has pension plan at Caldor's. No evidence was presented as to the current value of that plan. The value of the plan as of the date the plaintiff reaches age 65 is $21,579.00. The plaintiff presently has a gross weekly salary of $255.00. The plaintiff has liabilities consisting of VISA $2,968.00, and Dr. Bruder with a balance of $930.00. The defendant owns a 1982 Subaru


Jacqueline Barton v. Ronald Barton

domestic relations order: vings Bonds in the amount of $850.00, as well as the United Technology savings plan in the amount of $71,231.49. 7) The defendant is ordered to transfer to the plaintiff one-half of the present value of his Pratt Whitney pension benefits through a qualified domestic relations order. The plaintiff is ordered to transfer to the defendant one-half of the present value of her Caldor's pension benefits through a qualified domestic relations order. This order regarding both pension benefits is intended to be a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) as the term is used in the Retirement Equity Act of 1984. The court retains jurisdiction o


Jacqueline R. Regan v. William J. Regan, Jr. Date: 1995-08-08. Machine-draft public headnote: Jacqueline R. Regan v. William J. Regan, Jr. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


QDRO: be responsible for the Sears bill and the remaining bills on her financial affidavit. Retirement Accounts 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to 50% of the defendant's 401(k) A P Retirement Program Savings Plan and Pension Account by CT Page 9159 way of a QDRO. 2. The defendant shall be entitled to his Grand Union Retirement Plan and the company funded Union Pension Fund in view of the award of lifetime alimony to the plaintiff. Life Insurance The defendant shall provide and maintain life insurance as is available through his employment with the plaintiff and the minor child named as irrevocable beneficiari


retirement benefits: y rented at $104 per week, less condominium fees of $17 and condominium taxes of $25 per week. The other asset of the marriage is the marital home, valued at $149,000, and subject to a mortgage in the amount of $130,000. The defendant also has pension and retirement benefits totaling approximately $32,220. The plaintiff felt the defendant was unfaithful and was not supportive of her physical condition. The defendant felt the plaintiff was not communicative and never expressed her feelings. No useful purpose would be served in reviewing all the evidence presented in this matter. The court declines to assess fault to either


pension: is presently rented at $104 per week, less condominium fees of $17 and condominium taxes of $25 per week. The other asset of the marriage is the marital home, valued at $149,000, and subject to a mortgage in the amount of $130,000. The defendant also has pension and retirement benefits totaling approximately $32,220. The plaintiff felt the defendant was unfaithful and was not supportive of her physical condition. The defendant felt the plaintiff was not communicative and never expressed her feelings. No useful purpose would be served in reviewing all the evidence presented in this matter. The court declines to


401(k): the UI bill and the remaining bills on his financial affidavit. 3. The plaintiff shall be responsible for the Sears bill and the remaining bills on her financial affidavit. Retirement Accounts 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to 50% of the defendant's 401(k) A P Retirement Program Savings Plan and Pension Account by CT Page 9159 way of a QDRO. 2. The defendant shall be entitled to his Grand Union Retirement Plan and the company funded Union Pension Fund in view of the award of lifetime alimony to the plaintiff. Life Insurance The defendant shall provide and maintain life insurance as is available through


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings

Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings Date: 1999-01-15. Machine-draft public headnote: Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings

QDRO: for one-half (1/2) of the 401K loan payments, as well as the 12 1/2% of Two Thousand One Hundred and Fourteen and 14/100 ($2,114.14), the plaintiff shall transfer to a separate account 50% of the remaining proceeds of the 401K account as of the date that the qualified domestic relations order is implemented. 6. The plaintiff's counsel shall prepare a QDRO consistent CT Page 325 with the above orders within two weeks of this order and forward to Defendant's counsel. Defendant's counsel will consult with the plan trustee and advise Plaintiff's counsel of any requested changes within two weeks. The QDRO will be finalized and signed by both counse


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings

pension: ntitled to a fifty percent (50%) credit of said amount which is Four Hundred Seventy One and 58/100 ($471.58) as of November 2, 1998. 4. The defendant shall retain in his 401K account 12 1/2% of the Two Thousand One Hundred and Eleven and 14/100 ($2,111.14) pension contribution made by his employer since the date of dissolution which amounts to Two Hundred Sixty Four and 27/100 ($264.27). That pension contribution vested between May 1997 and April 30, 1998. The 12 1/2% represents the approximate 1 1/2 months that accrued since the date of dissolution. 5. After crediting the defendant for one-half (1/2) of the 401K l


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings

401(k): tiff has filed a motion for contempt coded #144. The court enters the following findings and orders regarding that motion. 1. The motion for contempt is denied. 2. No counsel fee are awarded in favor of either party. 3. The defendant shall retain in his 401K account a one-half (1/2) credit for all payments which he has paid against the loan balance in the amount of Two Thousand Fifty Seven and 14/100 ($2,057.14) as of the date of dissolution. Said payments total Nine Hundred Forty Three and 16/100 ($943.16) as of November 2, 1998. The defendant shall be entitled to a fifty percent (50%) credit of said amount wh


Jacqueline Teulings v. Robert Teulings

domestic relations order: alf (1/2) of the 401K loan payments, as well as the 12 1/2% of Two Thousand One Hundred and Fourteen and 14/100 ($2,114.14), the plaintiff shall transfer to a separate account 50% of the remaining proceeds of the 401K account as of the date that the qualified domestic relations order is implemented. 6. The plaintiff's counsel shall prepare a QDRO consistent CT Page 325 with the above orders within two weeks of this order and forward to Defendant's counsel. Defendant's counsel will consult with the plan trustee and advise Plaintiff's counsel of any requested changes within two weeks. The QDRO will be finalized and signed by both counse


James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith

James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith Citation: 653 A.2d 1259. Extracted reporter citation: 653 A.2d 1259. Date: 1995-05-19. Machine-draft public headnote: James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith


James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith

QDRO: roperty shall be placed with a real estate agent for sale and the wife shall be entitled to the sum of $17,000 plus accrued interest until the date of sale. Pension: The wife shall be entitled to 50% of the present value of the husband's pension by way of Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall prepare any QDRO documents necessary to effectuate this order. Counsel Fees: Each party shall be responsible for his or her own counsel fees. Personal Property: The wife shall have a one time access to the residence upon reasonable notice to the husband, for the purpose of obtaining any of her property stored in the cellar. She


James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith

pension: explain the monetary and property orders: Alimony: The husband, age 44, is a truck driver for Consolidated Freightways and has a net weekly salary of $500.00. (His financial affidavit improperly deducts stock, bonds and credit union deductions). He has a pension through his employment and has some $7000 in Consolidated Freightways stock. He earns $17.68 per hour a housewife for about thirteen years of the marriage — until 1982. She nets $260 per week, and gets no benefits, (no medical insurance, no pension, no vacation, no sick time). She presently resides with her mother and has not been receiving alimony pe


James C. Smith v. Barbara-Jean Smith

domestic relations order: all be placed with a real estate agent for sale and the wife shall be entitled to the sum of $17,000 plus accrued interest until the date of sale. Pension: The wife shall be entitled to 50% of the present value of the husband's pension by way of Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall prepare any QDRO documents necessary to effectuate this order. Counsel Fees: Each party shall be responsible for his or her own counsel fees. Personal Property: The wife shall have a one time access to the residence upon reasonable notice to the husband, for the purpose of obtaining any of her property stored in the cellar. She


James Cody v. Colette Cody

James Cody v. Colette Cody Date: 1991-07-25. Machine-draft public headnote: James Cody v. Colette Cody is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


James Cody v. Colette Cody

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


James Cody v. Colette Cody

QDRO: plaintiff shall be the sole owner of the 1981 BMW motor vehicle and the defendant shall execute the appropriate documents forthwith. 3. The defendant shall be entitled to her 1991 Nissan motor vehicle and shall be solely responsible for the loan thereon. QDRO The court orders that a Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall be prepared transferring to the defendant wife, a 35% share of the Core Retirement Benefit (IBM Retirement Plan). The personal retirement plan shall remain the sole property/asset of the plaintiff. Income Tax CT Page 5901 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to the income tax refunds, if a


James Cody v. Colette Cody

retirement benefits: efendant shall be entitled to her 1991 Nissan motor vehicle and shall be solely responsible for the loan thereon. QDRO The court orders that a Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall be prepared transferring to the defendant wife, a 35% share of the Core Retirement Benefit (IBM Retirement Plan). The personal retirement plan shall remain the sole property/asset of the plaintiff. Income Tax CT Page 5901 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to the income tax refunds, if any, on his 1990 Federal and State Income Tax Returns. 2. The plaintiff shall hold the defendant harmless from any and all liability, interest and/or penalti


James Cody v. Colette Cody

domestic relations order: 1981 BMW motor vehicle and the defendant shall execute the appropriate documents forthwith. 3. The defendant shall be entitled to her 1991 Nissan motor vehicle and shall be solely responsible for the loan thereon. QDRO The court orders that a Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall be prepared transferring to the defendant wife, a 35% share of the Core Retirement Benefit (IBM Retirement Plan). The personal retirement plan shall remain the sole property/asset of the plaintiff. Income Tax CT Page 5901 1. The plaintiff shall be entitled to the income tax refunds, if any, on his 1990 Federal and State Income Tax Returns. 2. Th


James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.

James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano. Date: 2002-08-19. Machine-draft public headnote: James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.


James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.

QDRO: ccordance with the applicable statute in the event she cohabits. The term of alimony cannot be modified downward. 5. The husband shall transfer to the wife 66% of his pension assets through the Steamfitters Union Pension listed on his financial affidavit by Qualified Domestic Relations Order, which shall be prepared by the wife's counsel or his designee. He shall transfer to her by Qualified Domestic Relations order the sum of one half of the annuity listed on his financial affidavit, but not less than $12,100.00. 6. The husband shall pay the wife $2,000.00 as attorneys fees. 7. The husband will maintain the wife as the sole beneficiary of


James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.

pension: ath of either party or the wife's remarriage, and will be subject to a redetermination in accordance with the applicable statute in the event she cohabits. The term of alimony cannot be modified downward. 5. The husband shall transfer to the wife 66% of his pension assets through the Steamfitters Union Pension listed on his financial affidavit by Qualified Domestic Relations Order, which shall be prepared by the wife's counsel or his designee. He shall transfer to her by Qualified Domestic Relations order the sum of one half of the annuity listed on his financial affidavit, but not less than $12,100.00. 6. The husba


James Rapuano v. Karyn Rapuano.

domestic relations order: with the applicable statute in the event she cohabits. The term of alimony cannot be modified downward. 5. The husband shall transfer to the wife 66% of his pension assets through the Steamfitters Union Pension listed on his financial affidavit by Qualified Domestic Relations Order, which shall be prepared by the wife's counsel or his designee. He shall transfer to her by Qualified Domestic Relations order the sum of one half of the annuity listed on his financial affidavit, but not less than $12,100.00. 6. The husband shall pay the wife $2,000.00 as attorneys fees. 7. The husband will maintain the wife as the sole beneficiary of


Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.

Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab. Date: 2001-03-14. Machine-draft public headnote: Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.


Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.

QDRO: tures in the house. Each party shall keep and retain their respective motor vehicles. Each party shall be responsible for and hold the other harmless from the debts shown on their financial affidavits. The plaintiff shall transfer to the Defendant by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order the amount of $20,000 from his Thrift Savings Plan. The plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant as alimony the amount of $100.00 per week for a period of six months, which amount and duration shall not be subject to modification. Each party shall be responsible for their own counsel fees. The Defendant shall be entitled to continue as an insured on the Plainti


Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.

pension: vor of either party. At the time of the trial the parties had two major assets: their house and lot at 14 Brookside Lane, Essex, Connecticut which the court finds has a value of $125,000 less the mortgage debt of $75,858.05 or $49,141.95 and the Plaintiff's pension from his employment as a postal worker (Thrift Savings Plan) which, on January 1, 2001 had a value of $66,033.89. Pl. Exhibit 5. The February and March payments on the mortgage debt of $752.54 each are in arrears and late charges are due. Neither party offered the court CT Page 3587 information about the value of the pension exactly as of the trial date. Bo


Jamieson v. Korab v. Patricia C. Korab.

domestic relations order: he house. Each party shall keep and retain their respective motor vehicles. Each party shall be responsible for and hold the other harmless from the debts shown on their financial affidavits. The plaintiff shall transfer to the Defendant by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order the amount of $20,000 from his Thrift Savings Plan. The plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant as alimony the amount of $100.00 per week for a period of six months, which amount and duration shall not be subject to modification. Each party shall be responsible for their own counsel fees. The Defendant shall be entitled to continue as an insured on the Plainti


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola

Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola Date: 1994-03-11. Machine-draft public headnote: Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola

QDRO: ocated at 15 Baldwin Road, Newtown, Connecticut, to the wife. She shall be responsible for all of the mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and all other expenses of said home and shall hold the husband harmless. 3. The court awards to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, a 25 percent joint and survivorship annuity in the husband's pension benefit through United Technologies Corporation. 4. The husband shall retain his entire interest in the savings plan. CT Page 2552 5. Upon the sale of the home by the wife, provided it is sold within three years and there is a capital gains to be paid because of a failure to defer sai


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola

retirement benefits: twenty-five (25) years prior to his termination in 1990. CT Page 2551 The wife works for a travel agency and her earnings are $38,000 annually. Neither party has requested alimony in their post judgment briefs. The wife does presently have an individual retirement plan. The husband's retirement plan with United Technologies Corporation would provide him with $985 per month at age sixty-five (65) or $819 at an early retirement. The husband also has an individual retirement plan which has a value of approximately the same as his wife's plan. The court need not dwell on the charges by each party as to the breakdown of th


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola

pension: of the mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and all other expenses of said home and shall hold the husband harmless. 3. The court awards to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, a 25 percent joint and survivorship annuity in the husband's pension benefit through United Technologies Corporation. 4. The husband shall retain his entire interest in the savings plan. CT Page 2552 5. Upon the sale of the home by the wife, provided it is sold within three years and there is a capital gains to be paid because of a failure to defer said capital gains consequence, the husband shall pay to the wife 50 perc


Jane M. Pierwola v. Stanley A. Pierwola

domestic relations order: 15 Baldwin Road, Newtown, Connecticut, to the wife. She shall be responsible for all of the mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and all other expenses of said home and shall hold the husband harmless. 3. The court awards to the wife, by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, a 25 percent joint and survivorship annuity in the husband's pension benefit through United Technologies Corporation. 4. The husband shall retain his entire interest in the savings plan. CT Page 2552 5. Upon the sale of the home by the wife, provided it is sold within three years and there is a capital gains to be paid because of a failure to defer sai


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root. Date: 2000-05-10. Machine-draft public headnote: Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root. is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to pension / defined benefit issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 5/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

QDRO: court declines to enter an order allowing attorney's fees to CT Page 5681 be paid to her by the defendant. The State of Connecticut pension is to be equally divided by the parties, which is presently being done and, if appropriate, the parties may submit a qualified domestic relations order to continue this in the future. The court will retain jurisdiction to issue any qualified domestic relations orders that may be necessary in connection with any of these assets. In addition to the equity of the family residence, the parties have stipulated as to the following assets and the valuations thereof: People Savings Bank Savings Account $47,200


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

pension: after allocated to the plaintiff will not be impacted substantially by her being responsible for her own attorney's fees, the court declines to enter an order allowing attorney's fees to CT Page 5681 be paid to her by the defendant. The State of Connecticut pension is to be equally divided by the parties, which is presently being done and, if appropriate, the parties may submit a qualified domestic relations order to continue this in the future. The court will retain jurisdiction to issue any qualified domestic relations orders that may be necessary in connection with any of these assets. In addition to the equity o


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

domestic relations order: lines to enter an order allowing attorney's fees to CT Page 5681 be paid to her by the defendant. The State of Connecticut pension is to be equally divided by the parties, which is presently being done and, if appropriate, the parties may submit a qualified domestic relations order to continue this in the future. The court will retain jurisdiction to issue any qualified domestic relations orders that may be necessary in connection with any of these assets. In addition to the equity of the family residence, the parties have stipulated as to the following assets and the valuations thereof: People Savings Bank Savings Account $47,200


Janet K. Root v. Robert J. Root.

valuation/division: a distribution order herein. Based upon the statutory criteria which outlines those factors the court should consider in determining property settlement award and alimony, the court finds that under the circumstances of this long term marriage that a fair and equitable distribution of the marital assets is determined to be sixty percent (60%) set over to the wife and forty percent (40%) set over to the husband. The parties have agreed and the court directs that in said distribution the residence premises, which the court finds to have an equity value of $105,000.00, shall be set over to the plaintiff to be hers absolutely and she sh