Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski

QDRO: bilities relating to this vehicle. CT Page 6954 The husband shall transfer to the wife $10,000 of his pension as identified on the husband's financial affidavit. This transfer shall be joint with a right of survivorship and shall be accomplished by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or any other method required by the administrator of the pension plan. Neither party has made a claim regarding any other item of personal property. Except as otherwise previously provided, the parties shall retain the property as listed on their respective financial affidavits or presently in their possession. 7. Debt divisions. The joint liabilities s


Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski

retirement benefits: . The husband lists personal, weekly expenses of approximately $435 (excluding the pendente lite alimony and support). He has liabilities totaling $26,615 and $2,620 of these liabilities he lists as joint liabilities. According to his financial affidavit, his retirement plan has a value of about $46,990. He also has other, relatively small personal assets as listed on his financial affidavit. The parties' marital residence on Lilac Court, Cheshire, Connecticut was purchased in 1997 for $194,000. The mortgage on the property has an outstanding balance of about $186,000. The parties disagree about the value of this house, and e


Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski

pension: as in the 1991 Ford Taurus. The husband shall own the 1991 Ford Taurus to the exclusion of the wife and he shall pay and hold her harmless regarding all liabilities relating to this vehicle. CT Page 6954 The husband shall transfer to the wife $10,000 of his pension as identified on the husband's financial affidavit. This transfer shall be joint with a right of survivorship and shall be accomplished by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or any other method required by the administrator of the pension plan. Neither party has made a claim regarding any other item of personal property. Except as otherwise previ


Daria Duglenski v. Peter Duglenski

domestic relations order: elating to this vehicle. CT Page 6954 The husband shall transfer to the wife $10,000 of his pension as identified on the husband's financial affidavit. This transfer shall be joint with a right of survivorship and shall be accomplished by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or any other method required by the administrator of the pension plan. Neither party has made a claim regarding any other item of personal property. Except as otherwise previously provided, the parties shall retain the property as listed on their respective financial affidavits or presently in their possession. 7. Debt divisions. The joint liabilities s


David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.

David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi. Date: 2000-05-26. Machine-draft public headnote: David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi. 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.


David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.

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.


David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.

QDRO: defendant wife is to pay those liabilities listed on her financial affidavit owed to M/C Merchant Bank CT Page 6378 and First USA. The plaintiff husband shall convey one half of the value of his pension as of May, 9, 2000 to the defendant wife by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff husband is to pay the sum of $100.00 per week as alimony to the defendant wife. Said alimony shall terminate upon the death of either party, the remarriage or cohabitation, as defined by statute, of the defendant wife, or May 9, 2010, whichever shall occur first. The plaintiff shall quit claim all his right title and interest in the real


David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.

pension: ted on his financial affidavit owed to Discover and Sears. The defendant wife is to pay those liabilities listed on her financial affidavit owed to M/C Merchant Bank CT Page 6378 and First USA. The plaintiff husband shall convey one half of the value of his pension as of May, 9, 2000 to the defendant wife by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff husband is to pay the sum of $100.00 per week as alimony to the defendant wife. Said alimony shall terminate upon the death of either party, the remarriage or cohabitation, as defined by statute, of the defendant wife, or May 9, 2010, whichever shall o


David Derisi v. Sheila T. Derisi.

domestic relations order: wife is to pay those liabilities listed on her financial affidavit owed to M/C Merchant Bank CT Page 6378 and First USA. The plaintiff husband shall convey one half of the value of his pension as of May, 9, 2000 to the defendant wife by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff husband is to pay the sum of $100.00 per week as alimony to the defendant wife. Said alimony shall terminate upon the death of either party, the remarriage or cohabitation, as defined by statute, of the defendant wife, or May 9, 2010, whichever shall occur first. The plaintiff shall quit claim all his right title and interest in the real


David Glover v. Jean Glover

David Glover v. Jean Glover Date: 1999-06-16. Machine-draft public headnote: David Glover v. Jean Glover 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.


David Glover v. Jean Glover


David Glover v. Jean Glover

QDRO: until Derek turns 19 or graduates from high school. Thereafter, the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant $75 per week alimony for eight years. Said alimony is modifiable as to amount but not as to term. 2. Plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant by way of QDRO 40% of his Navy pension. 3. The plaintiff shall put the defendant as surviving beneficiary of his Navy pension. 4. Each party shall pay their own attorney's fees. Vasington, JTR


David Glover v. Jean Glover

pension: OR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION On April 3, 1997, Austin, J. granted the parties a decree dissolving their marriage. The court did not award defendant any alimony or a portion of plaintiff's Navy pension. Since defendant claims that she was unaware of the hearing of April 3, 1997 and was not present because of plaintiff's actions, she filed a motion to open and modify the judgment. After a hearing, Austin, J. granted the defendant's motion. The court found that defendant failed to appear at the hearing of the dissolution of the marriage on April 3, 1997 b


David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen

David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen Date: 1999-07-28. Machine-draft public headnote: David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen 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.


David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen


David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen

QDRO: n. Defendant shall be nominated beneficiary of any pre-retirement survivor death benefits. Said obligation shall become a claim against plaintiffs estate in the event he fails to comply with said obligation. Said pension benefits shall be assigned by way of a QDRO, and the court will retain continuing jurisdiction over this matter to effectuate said transfer. The defendant shall receive $30,000.00 gross from the plaintiffs savings plan with his employer, plus any interest/performance thereon on said amount that accrues from the CT Page 9835 date of final decree to distribution. Said sums shall be transferred to the


David R. Allen v. Sonia S. Allen

pension: hall be the sole owner of the 1997 Camper Trailer and will be responsible for the land lease. The defendant shall be the sole owner of the 1993 Ford Taurus and be responsible for all expenses therewith. The defendant shall receive one-half of the plaintiffs pension benefits as they have accrued of the date of the final dissolution, plus any interest and performance thereon which accrues from said dissolution until distribution. Defendant shall be nominated beneficiary of any pre-retirement survivor death benefits. Said obligation shall become a claim against plaintiffs estate in the event he fails to comply with said


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn

David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn Date: 1998-05-14. Machine-draft public headnote: David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn 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.


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn

QDRO: ) plan. The husband shall retain as his sole property his Sheet Metal Works #40 annuity. The other pension or retirement plans listed as deferred compensation plans on the parties' financial statements shall each be divided equally between the parties through Qualified Domestic Relations Orders or such other documents consistent with the terms of the plans. 2. The wife shall retain as her sole property the 1990 Mercury Cougar and the husband shall transfer his interest in this vehicle to her. The wife shall also retain as her sole property the 1994 Ford Escort which is solely in her name. The husband shall retain as his sole property the 1995 F


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn

retirement benefits: nt so that such a payment may be indirectly acquired. 2. Personal Property and Liabilities 1. The wife shall retain as her sole property her 401(k) plan. The husband shall retain as his sole property his Sheet Metal Works #40 annuity. The other pension or retirement plans listed as deferred compensation plans on the parties' financial statements shall each be divided equally between the parties through Qualified Domestic Relations Orders or such other documents consistent with the terms of the plans. 2. The wife shall retain as her sole property the 1990 Mercury Cougar and the husband shall transfer his interest in this v


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn

pension: ty settlement so that such a payment may be indirectly acquired. 2. Personal Property and Liabilities 1. The wife shall retain as her sole property her 401(k) plan. The husband shall retain as his sole property his Sheet Metal Works #40 annuity. The other pension or retirement plans listed as deferred compensation plans on the parties' financial statements shall each be divided equally between the parties through Qualified Domestic Relations Orders or such other documents consistent with the terms of the plans. 2. The wife shall retain as her sole property the 1990 Mercury Cougar and the husband shall transfer his


David Russell Gunn v. Mary Ann Gunn

401(k): g an order requiring a party to pay post-majority child support and the court declines to order a property settlement so that such a payment may be indirectly acquired. 2. Personal Property and Liabilities 1. The wife shall retain as her sole property her 401(k) plan. The husband shall retain as his sole property his Sheet Metal Works #40 annuity. The other pension or retirement plans listed as deferred compensation plans on the parties' financial statements shall each be divided equally between the parties through Qualified Domestic Relations Orders or such other documents consistent with the terms of the plans.


Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez

Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez Date: 1999-07-28. Machine-draft public headnote: Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez 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.


Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez


Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez

QDRO: ding loan obligation which she shall assume and save the Husband harmless. The Husband shall retain the 1979 Buick. All bank accounts shall remain in the name of the party owning same. RETIREMENT ASSETS The Husband shall transfer to the Wife pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) a 50% interest in his vested pension benefit at Normag Inc. represented to be $437.14 per month at age 65. The Husband shall cause said QDRO to be prepared at his expense and file same with the court within 90 days from date. LIABILITIES The Husband shall assume all the obligations shown on his financial affidavit and the Wife shall assume the J.


Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez

pension: ss. The Husband shall retain the 1979 Buick. All bank accounts shall remain in the name of the party owning same. RETIREMENT ASSETS The Husband shall transfer to the Wife pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) a 50% interest in his vested pension benefit at Normag Inc. represented to be $437.14 per month at age 65. The Husband shall cause said QDRO to be prepared at his expense and file same with the court within 90 days from date. LIABILITIES The Husband shall assume all the obligations shown on his financial affidavit and the Wife shall assume the J.C. Penny and Chase Visa obligations shown on


Dawn B. Gonzales v. Cirilo Gonzalez

domestic relations order: obligation which she shall assume and save the Husband harmless. The Husband shall retain the 1979 Buick. All bank accounts shall remain in the name of the party owning same. RETIREMENT ASSETS The Husband shall transfer to the Wife pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) a 50% interest in his vested pension benefit at Normag Inc. represented to be $437.14 per month at age 65. The Husband shall cause said QDRO to be prepared at his expense and file same with the court within 90 days from date. LIABILITIES The Husband shall assume all the obligations shown on his financial affidavit and the Wife shall assume the J.


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott Docket: established that the interests of justice were not. Date: 1999-11-24. Machine-draft public headnote: Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott 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.


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

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.


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

QDRO: free and clear of any claims by the other. The wife shall retain her Aetna deferred compensation account and the husband shall retain his 401-k account free and clear of any claims by the other. The wife shall receive 50% of the husband's pension through a qualified domestic relations order or such other document consistent with the terms of the plan. The plaintiffs counsel shall prepare this order for the court's review and consideration. Within fourteen days from the date of this judgment, the wife shall transfer to the husband the Volvo. The wife shall transfer to the husband the Plymouth Voyager when the wife obtains a replacement vehicl


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

pension: nk accounts containing $1,446 and stock valued at $2517. Although the husband does not list any deferred compensation accounts on his financial affidavit, the evidence establishes that through his employment he has a 401-k having a value of about $2,170 and a pension having an annual estimated payment of $5,192. The evidence establishes that the irretrievable breakdown of the parties' marriage was caused by the husband's excessive use of alcohol. The husband has an alcohol problem which he denies and has failed fully to appreciate or address. ORDERS 1. Dissolution of marriage. The parties' marriage is hereby dissol


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

domestic relations order: clear of any claims by the other. The wife shall retain her Aetna deferred compensation account and the husband shall retain his 401-k account free and clear of any claims by the other. The wife shall receive 50% of the husband's pension through a qualified domestic relations order or such other document consistent with the terms of the plan. The plaintiffs counsel shall prepare this order for the court's review and consideration. Within fourteen days from the date of this judgment, the wife shall transfer to the husband the Volvo. The wife shall transfer to the husband the Plymouth Voyager when the wife obtains a replacement vehicl


Deborah Elliott v. John Elliott

valuation/division: unt of $50 a week for seven years. This alimony shall terminate upon the death of either party, the wife's remarriage or the wife's cohabitation as defined by statute. This alimony shall be paid through a wage withholding in the manner authorized by law. 7. Property divisions. The husband shall quitclaim all his right, title and interest in the marital residence to the wife within fourteen days from the date of the judgment. The wife shall thereafter indemnify and hold the husband harmless as to any and all expenses, costs, repairs, or taxes associated with said residence. If the husband fails to execute the quitclaim deed with


Deborah Narowski v. Gregory Narowski. Ct Page 6261 Date: 2002-05-17. Machine-draft public headnote: Deborah Narowski v. Gregory Narowski. Ct Page 6261 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.


QDRO: ch party is entitled. The wife is to retain her two Janey Montgomery Scott accounts and her two Oppenheimer Fund accounts totaling $42,683.69. In order to accomplish the court ordered division, the husband is to immediately transfer to the wife, pursuant to a qualified domestic relations order, the sum of $46,430.71 from his 401 K plan. CUTSUMPAS, J.


401(k): (wife's account) 1,939.90 • Janey Montgomery Scott (wife's account) 24,789.83 • Oppenheimer Fund (wife's account) 14,238.73 • Oppenheimer Fund (wife's account) 1,715.23 • Paine Webber (husband's account) 15,863.87 • UTC 401k plan (husband's account) 119,681.24 Total $178,228.80 One half of the above total equals $89,114.40, the amount to which each party is entitled. The wife is to retain her two Janey Montgomery Scott accounts and her two Oppenheimer Fund accounts totaling $42,683.69. In order to accomplish the court ordered division, the husband is to immediately transfer


domestic relations order: s entitled. The wife is to retain her two Janey Montgomery Scott accounts and her two Oppenheimer Fund accounts totaling $42,683.69. In order to accomplish the court ordered division, the husband is to immediately transfer to the wife, pursuant to a qualified domestic relations order, the sum of $46,430.71 from his 401 K plan. CUTSUMPAS, J.


Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, Jr. Date: 2000-04-06. Machine-draft public headnote: Deborah S. Renals v. John J. Renals, 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: he amount of CT Page 5085-cn $225,000. The defendant testified that he does not have to contribute to the cost of this life insurance. 9. The defendant shall transfer 50% of his National Guard pension, with a stipulated value of $30,000, to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall transfer 30% of his regular employment pension to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall retain her 401(k) fund. 10. Each party shall be solely responsible for the debts and liabilities shown on their respective March 23, 2000 financial affidavits, as amended, except that the plaintiff shall be solely


pension: f the marital home in Ellington, Connecticut is $144,000(2) The current debt of the first mortgage on the marital home is $30,000(3) The current debt on the second mortgage on the marital home is $28,000(4) The value of the defendant's military National Guard pension is $30,000. The court takes judicial notice of the prior pendente lite proceedings in this case contained in the court file. The court heard testimony from the plaintiff, the defendant, Walter Rudewicz, and Gloria Mancarella. From the testimony and evidence produced, and after carefully assessing the credibility of the witnesses, the court finds the follo


401(k): or vehicles including a 1994 Nissan Altima, 1988 Jeep Comanche, 1958 Mercedes 280, a 1999 Ford Escort, and a motorcycle. As of the date of trial the total funds reported in their checking and savings account was only $402. The only other assets are the wife's 401(k) account valued at $2500 and the husbands employment and National Guard Pensions. CT Page 5085-cl The court takes note that on October 26, 1998 the plaintiff filed a financial affidavit with the court relating to her pendente lite motion for alimony and child support. That affidavit listed total liabilities in the amount of $7,243, including a debt of $5,9


domestic relations order: of CT Page 5085-cn $225,000. The defendant testified that he does not have to contribute to the cost of this life insurance. 9. The defendant shall transfer 50% of his National Guard pension, with a stipulated value of $30,000, to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall transfer 30% of his regular employment pension to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall retain her 401(k) fund. 10. Each party shall be solely responsible for the debts and liabilities shown on their respective March 23, 2000 financial affidavits, as amended, except that the plaintiff shall be solely


QDRO: on his life in the amount of $225,000. The defendant testified that he does not have to contribute to the cost of this life insurance. 9. The defendant shall transfer 50% of his National Guard pension, with a stipulated value of $30,000, to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall transfer 30% of his regular employment pension to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall retain her 401(k) fund. 10. Each party shall be solely responsible for the debts and liabilities shown on their respective March 23, 2000 financial affidavits, as amended, except that the plaintiff shall be solely


401(k): or vehicles including a 1994 Nissan Altima, 1988 Jeep Comanche, 1958 Mercedes 280, a 1999 Ford Escort, and a motorcycle. As of the date of trial the total funds reported in their checking and savings account was only $402. The only other assets are the wife's 401(k) account valued at $2500 and the husbands employment and National Guard Pensions. The court takes note that on October 26, 1998 the plaintiff filed a financial affidavit with the court relating to her pendente lite motion for alimony and child support. That affidavit listed total liabilities in the amount of $7,243, including a debt of $5,990 on an AFBA VI


domestic relations order: e in the amount of $225,000. The defendant testified that he does not have to contribute to the cost of this life insurance. 9. The defendant shall transfer 50% of his National Guard pension, with a stipulated value of $30,000, to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall transfer 30% of his regular employment pension to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order. The plaintiff shall retain her 401(k) fund. 10. Each party shall be solely responsible for the debts and liabilities shown on their respective March 23, 2000 financial affidavits, as amended, except that the plaintiff shall be solely


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy. Date: 2001-02-23. Machine-draft public headnote: Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy. 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.


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

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.


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

QDRO: from his father without claim from the Wife. RETIREMENT ASSETS The Vanguard IRA and TIAA accounts shall be lumped together and divided equally. The Husband shall cause a rollover to the Wife's account to accomplish the division or prepare, if necessary, a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to accomplish same. The Husband shall retain his Tier I retirement benefits at the Metro-North Railroad. The spouse's benefit under the Railroad Retirement Act is not affected by these orders. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife by QDRO an interest in his Tier II retirement benefits as follows: the Wife's share shall be computed by multiplying


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

retirement benefits: s shall be lumped together and divided equally. The Husband shall cause a rollover to the Wife's account to accomplish the division or prepare, if necessary, a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to accomplish same. The Husband shall retain his Tier I retirement benefits at the Metro-North Railroad. The spouse's benefit under the Railroad Retirement Act is not affected by these orders. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife by QDRO an interest in his Tier II retirement benefits as follows: the Wife's share shall be computed by multiplying the divisible portion of the Husband's monthly benefit by a CT Page 2842 fraction t


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

pension: equity $164,390.00 • home furnishings/personal belongings 15,000.00 • Vanguard IRA's (H) 36,300.00 • TIAA Annuity (W) 6,576.46 • 96 Chevy Lumina equity (W) -0- • 87 Nissan (H) -0- • 90 Ford (H) 2,900.00 • Metro-North Pension ? • Personal injury action ? Liabilities of the parties, excluding counsel fees for this action, include the following: • GMAC $5,400.00 • Milford Tax Collector 10,742.07 • Sallie Mae (student loan) 27,010.00 • AFSA (Student loan) 3,593.00 • Levitz 842.00 • Lechmere 848.00 • Service Merchandise 705.00 &#82


Deborah Yanosy v. Thomas Yanosy.

domestic relations order: ather without claim from the Wife. RETIREMENT ASSETS The Vanguard IRA and TIAA accounts shall be lumped together and divided equally. The Husband shall cause a rollover to the Wife's account to accomplish the division or prepare, if necessary, a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to accomplish same. The Husband shall retain his Tier I retirement benefits at the Metro-North Railroad. The spouse's benefit under the Railroad Retirement Act is not affected by these orders. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife by QDRO an interest in his Tier II retirement benefits as follows: the Wife's share shall be computed by multiplying


Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.

Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch. Date: 2002-12-20. Machine-draft public headnote: Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch. 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.


Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.


Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.

QDRO: coverage presently in place. The agreement also provides for daycare expenses. The agreement treats an obligation on the plaintiff to apply for Husky insurance coverage and for Cobra benefits for the plaintiff. The agreement refers to the preparation of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order document relative to the plaintiffs receipt of a one-half share of the defendant's 401K. The agreement touches on and treats automobiles as between the parties, bank accounts, personalty, debts, life insurance. Both the plaintiff and the defendant testified as to the irretrievable breakdown of the marital union. CT Page 16324 As indicated, the two reser


Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.

401(k): , $301.55 for a net of CT Page 16323 $592.97. Claimed weekly expenses, $941.51. Debt of the defendant, $10,705.00. No real estate. Two automobiles, total equity, $3,200.00. Two other older automobiles and personalty listed at $1,300.00; $135.00 in the bank, a 401K valued at $8,517.43. A separation agreement presented to the court for acceptance reflects that there shall be joint legal custody of the minor boys with the plaintiff mother being the primary custodial parent. Reasonable rights of visitation as spelled out in detail in the lengthy separation agreement. Child support in the amount of $204.00 a week, which


Debra A. Hensch v. John T. Hensch.

domestic relations order: resently in place. The agreement also provides for daycare expenses. The agreement treats an obligation on the plaintiff to apply for Husky insurance coverage and for Cobra benefits for the plaintiff. The agreement refers to the preparation of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order document relative to the plaintiffs receipt of a one-half share of the defendant's 401K. The agreement touches on and treats automobiles as between the parties, bank accounts, personalty, debts, life insurance. Both the plaintiff and the defendant testified as to the irretrievable breakdown of the marital union. CT Page 16324 As indicated, the two reser


Debra Ann Consiglio v. Andrew Consiglio. Date: 2002-11-13. Machine-draft public headnote: Debra Ann Consiglio v. Andrew Consiglio. 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: s free and clear of any claims by the Wife. PENSIONS AND 401K ACCOUNTS CT Page 14430 The Husband shall retain his pension, free and clear of any claim by the Wife. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife the sum of $30,000.00 from his 401K by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, if necessary. Any cost for preparation of same shall be paid for equally by the parties. The court shall continue its jurisdiction for the purpose of effectuating the terms of this clause so that its intent and purposes may be carried through. INCOME TAX REFUND CHECKS The court finds that the Husband properly used the 2000 income tax return for family


pension: n his financial affidavit. WORKERS COMPENSATION By agreement of the parties, the Husband shall retain his workers compensation settlements free and clear of any claims by the Wife. PENSIONS AND 401K ACCOUNTS CT Page 14430 The Husband shall retain his pension, free and clear of any claim by the Wife. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife the sum of $30,000.00 from his 401K by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, if necessary. Any cost for preparation of same shall be paid for equally by the parties. The court shall continue its jurisdiction for the purpose of effectuating the terms of this clause so


401(k): . The Husband shall retain all the other vehicles listed in his financial affidavit. WORKERS COMPENSATION By agreement of the parties, the Husband shall retain his workers compensation settlements free and clear of any claims by the Wife. PENSIONS AND 401K ACCOUNTS CT Page 14430 The Husband shall retain his pension, free and clear of any claim by the Wife. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife the sum of $30,000.00 from his 401K by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, if necessary. Any cost for preparation of same shall be paid for equally by the parties. The court shall continue its jurisdict


domestic relations order: clear of any claims by the Wife. PENSIONS AND 401K ACCOUNTS CT Page 14430 The Husband shall retain his pension, free and clear of any claim by the Wife. The Husband shall transfer to the Wife the sum of $30,000.00 from his 401K by means of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, if necessary. Any cost for preparation of same shall be paid for equally by the parties. The court shall continue its jurisdiction for the purpose of effectuating the terms of this clause so that its intent and purposes may be carried through. INCOME TAX REFUND CHECKS The court finds that the Husband properly used the 2000 income tax return for family


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.

Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley. Date: 2001-04-30. Machine-draft public headnote: Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley. 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.


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.

QDRO: sting life insurance policy in effect and list the defendant as beneficiary during the minority of the minor children. Each party shall be entitled to the present cash value of their existing policies. The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order one-third of the value of the defendant's military pension commencing at the time of his termination from military service. The plaintiff shall be entitled to any proportionate increase in the value of said pension based upon cost of living adjustment or similar increase. The plaintiff shall also own the entire TIAA/CREF plan currently in her name free of a


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.

pension: oss and Mr. Bentley's is $1,390.00 per week gross. Mr. Bentley has indicated that he will be forced to retire upon his twentieth year in the service at his present rank. That will take place in October of this year. Upon retirement, he will receive a military pension of $2,000.00 per month. The majority of the plaintiffs assets consist of the Colchester, Connecticut residence, and a residence jointly owned in Washington, DC. In addition, there is some cash value in insurance policies, a 401K plan held by Mrs. Bentley and the military pension as aforementioned. ORDERS: The court has considered the statutory criteri


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.

401(k): e will receive a military pension of $2,000.00 per month. The majority of the plaintiffs assets consist of the Colchester, Connecticut residence, and a residence jointly owned in Washington, DC. In addition, there is some cash value in insurance policies, a 401K plan held by Mrs. Bentley and the military pension as aforementioned. ORDERS: The court has considered the statutory criteria applicable to this matter. It is found that the marriage of the parties has broken down irretrievably. Said marriage is hereby ordered dissolved. The court further orders the following: The parties shall have joint custody of


Denise A. Bentley v. Kevin C. Bentley.

domestic relations order: insurance policy in effect and list the defendant as beneficiary during the minority of the minor children. Each party shall be entitled to the present cash value of their existing policies. The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order one-third of the value of the defendant's military pension commencing at the time of his termination from military service. The plaintiff shall be entitled to any proportionate increase in the value of said pension based upon cost of living adjustment or similar increase. The plaintiff shall also own the entire TIAA/CREF plan currently in her name free of a


Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith

Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith Date: 1998-11-25. Machine-draft public headnote: Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. 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.


Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith

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.


Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith

QDRO: ble to bear any of the expense. PENSION The defendant has certain pension rights with present or former employers or has had these rights. It is ordered that one-half of any pension assets he now has available shall be assigned to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). The plaintiff shall have one-half the value of any pension assets that have been disposed of by the defendant. The net effect of this order is that the plaintiff shall have one-half of any and all pension assets or the value thereof that the defendant is entitled to or has been entitled to. DEPENDENCY DEDUCTION The defendant shall be entitled to


Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith

pension: ttorney's fees incurred in the present court action for the dissolution of the marriage in the amount of $8500 to be paid to plaintiff's attorney on or before December 8, 1998. The Court makes a finding that defendant is not able to bear any of the expense. PENSION The defendant has certain pension rights with present or former employers or has had these rights. It is ordered that one-half of any pension assets he now has available shall be assigned to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). The plaintiff shall have one-half the value of any pension assets that have been disposed of by th


Denise Burton-Smith v. Allan M. Smith

domestic relations order: r any of the expense. PENSION The defendant has certain pension rights with present or former employers or has had these rights. It is ordered that one-half of any pension assets he now has available shall be assigned to the plaintiff by way of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). The plaintiff shall have one-half the value of any pension assets that have been disposed of by the defendant. The net effect of this order is that the plaintiff shall have one-half of any and all pension assets or the value thereof that the defendant is entitled to or has been entitled to. DEPENDENCY DEDUCTION The defendant shall be entitled to


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd

Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd Date: 1998-11-24. Machine-draft public headnote: Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd 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.


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd

QDRO: re the responsibility of the plaintiff under Paragraph 1 hereof. The time for this payment may be extended by thirty days if the plaintiff require that time to mortgage the condominium to obtain the funds. 4. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) the entire amount of his pension, which is listed on his financial affidavits as having a value of $26,000 but the value of which is found by the court to be $40,562.40. Each party shall retain the other retirement accounts and retirement savings plans listed on their respective financial affidavits. 5. Each party shall retain the automobile(s) lis


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd

retirement benefits: defendant by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) the entire amount of his pension, which is listed on his financial affidavits as having a value of $26,000 but the value of which is found by the court to be $40,562.40. Each party shall retain the other retirement accounts and retirement savings plans listed on their respective financial affidavits. 5. Each party shall retain the automobile(s) listed on their respective financial affidavits. 6. The plaintiff shall pay the defendant $193 per week as child support for the minor child until she reaches the age of eighteen or graduates from high school but in no event past h


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd

pension: e time for this payment may be extended by thirty days if the plaintiff require that time to mortgage the condominium to obtain the funds. 4. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) the entire amount of his pension, which is listed on his financial affidavits as having a value of $26,000 but the value of which is found by the court to be $40,562.40. Each party shall retain the other retirement accounts and retirement savings plans listed on their respective financial affidavits. 5. Each party shall retain the automobile(s) listed on their respective financial affida


Dennis A. Dowd v. Shrimatee Dowd

domestic relations order: ponsibility of the plaintiff under Paragraph 1 hereof. The time for this payment may be extended by thirty days if the plaintiff require that time to mortgage the condominium to obtain the funds. 4. The plaintiff shall transfer to the defendant by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) the entire amount of his pension, which is listed on his financial affidavits as having a value of $26,000 but the value of which is found by the court to be $40,562.40. Each party shall retain the other retirement accounts and retirement savings plans listed on their respective financial affidavits. 5. Each party shall retain the automobile(s) lis


Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.

Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr. Date: 2002-07-11. Machine-draft public headnote: Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr. 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.


Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.


Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.

QDRO: and Trust in the approximate amount of $36,132.82, a Prudential Annuity (#96544360) in the approximate amount of $6,037.41. The approximate total of all these accounts is $134,345.23. These accounts shall be divided equally by the parties. In the event that a QDRO is necessary to divide any of these accounts, the parties shall equally share the cost of preparation of any necessary documents. The Superior Court shall retain jurisdiction over the accounts until they are distributed between the parties and to resolve any disputes which may arise with regard to the preparation and execution of the QDROs. However, the W


Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.

retirement benefits: all remain the sole property of the person whose name is oh the account. The Wife has a TIAF Account the approximate amount of $25,200.00. The Husband has a Prudential Annuity Account (#96530663) in the approximate amount of $66,975.00, a Tyres Organization Retirement Plan and Trust in the approximate amount of $36,132.82, a Prudential Annuity (#96544360) in the approximate amount of $6,037.41. The approximate total of all these accounts is $134,345.23. These accounts shall be divided equally by the parties. In the event that a QDRO is necessary to divide any of these accounts, the parties shall equally share the cost of prep


Diane M. Tenk v. Joseph Tenk, Jr.

401(k): or the debts on her financial affidavit. BANK ACCOUNTS — CHILDREN The parties have agreed that the bank accounts, being held for the benefit of the children, shall remain the property of the children. BANK ACCOUNTS, DEFERRED COMPENSATION ACCOUNTS, 401K ACCOUNTS, RETIREMENTS ACCOUNTS The parties each have bank accounts at People's Bank, these accounts shall remain the sole property of the person whose name is oh the account. The Wife has a TIAF Account the approximate amount of $25,200.00. The Husband has a Prudential Annuity Account (#96530663) in the approximate amount of $66,975.00, a Tyres Organiza


Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey

Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey Date: 1999-03-16. Machine-draft public headnote: Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey 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.


Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey

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.


Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey

QDRO: e which shall occur within 120 days of judgment. The defendant shall make every effort to remove plaintiff from obligation on the note and present mortgage securing said obligation. The Court shall retain jurisdiction on the execution and maintenance of any QDRO. ARTICULATION Pursuant to the motion for articulation filed by defendant on January 29, 1999, it was the Court's intention that the $6000 payment ordered in its judgment at page 5, subsection (C) is additional periodic alimony. It was also the Court's intention at page 5, subsection (D) that the plaintiff shall be entitled to 25 percent of the net amou


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody Date: 1993-04-23. Machine-draft public headnote: Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody 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.


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

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.


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

QDRO: of dissolution of the marriage shall enter on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. DIVISION OF CERTAIN ASSETS The parties shall share equally the IBM Retirement Plan pension that the husband receives from his prior employment at IBM. A Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall enter giving to the wife, a 50% interest in said Plan. The parties shall share equally in the account balance of the husband's IBM Tax Deferred Savings Plan as of December 31, 1992, together with a pro rata share of any gains or losses in said Plan from December 31, 1992 to the date of distribution. This order shall have no effect on the husband's r


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

retirement benefits: . 46b-82 (the alimony statute). Accordingly, the Court orders as follows: A decree of dissolution of the marriage shall enter on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. DIVISION OF CERTAIN ASSETS The parties shall share equally the IBM Retirement Plan pension that the husband receives from his prior employment at IBM. A Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall enter giving to the wife, a 50% interest in said Plan. The parties shall share equally in the account balance of the husband's IBM Tax Deferred Savings Plan as of December 31, 1992, together with a pro rata share of any gains or losses in said Pl


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

pension: nsel, the estimate of the wife's annual earning capacity is $10,000.00 by the wife and $15,000 by the husband. The husband has been continuously employed since the marriage. He retired from I.B.M. in June, 1989 after 27 years with the company and receives a pension from them slightly in excess of $30,000.00 per year. Additionally, since retirement from IBM, he has continued work as an independent consultant, primarily to the utility industry and has averaged $143,000.00 for the period through 1992. The husband testified that the primary source of his consulting income was from one company which had paid him $10,000.00


Dolores L. Briody v. Laurence P. Briody

domestic relations order: ution of the marriage shall enter on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. DIVISION OF CERTAIN ASSETS The parties shall share equally the IBM Retirement Plan pension that the husband receives from his prior employment at IBM. A Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall enter giving to the wife, a 50% interest in said Plan. The parties shall share equally in the account balance of the husband's IBM Tax Deferred Savings Plan as of December 31, 1992, together with a pro rata share of any gains or losses in said Plan from December 31, 1992 to the date of distribution. This order shall have no effect on the husband's r


Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael

Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael Date: 1995-01-31. Machine-draft public headnote: Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael 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.


Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael

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


Don Carmichael v. Julie Carmichael

QDRO: The plaintiff has clearly established a substantial change of his circumstances since the original alimony order was entered. He is entitled to a modification. The periodic alimony order is reduced to $1.00 per year. The plaintiff also seeks to terminate a QDRO designed to collect the alimony. This request is denied. The plaintiff also seeks to terminate life insurance. Article VI of the Separation Agreement provides for various contingencies that were not addressed in this hearing. The court declines to address the insurance issue. The modification is entered. No retroactivity is ordered, § 46b-86 (a).


Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer

Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer Date: 1992-01-07. Machine-draft public headnote: Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer 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.


Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer


Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer

QDRO: f a property settlement. Said sum shall be paid within 30 days of date. B. In addition, the plaintiff shall forthwith transfer to the defendant the sum of $40,000 in profit sharing funds to the defendant's IRA account. Said payment may be made pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or in any other manner as the parties shall agree. The court finds that the plaintiff's pension increased by $101,974 during the marriage. In addition, the plaintiff's Profit Sharing Plan substantially increased during the course of the marriage. 3. Alimony The plaintiff is awarded periodic alimony in the amount of $1.00 per year for a period of four


Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer

pension: fer to the defendant the sum of $40,000 in profit sharing funds to the defendant's IRA account. Said payment may be made pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or in any other manner as the parties shall agree. The court finds that the plaintiff's pension increased by $101,974 during the marriage. In addition, the plaintiff's Profit Sharing Plan substantially increased during the course of the marriage. 3. Alimony The plaintiff is awarded periodic alimony in the amount of $1.00 per year for a period of four years from date. The term of alimony shall be non modifiable. Said alimony shall be modified as to


Donald Blair v. Constance Sommer

domestic relations order: ty settlement. Said sum shall be paid within 30 days of date. B. In addition, the plaintiff shall forthwith transfer to the defendant the sum of $40,000 in profit sharing funds to the defendant's IRA account. Said payment may be made pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order or in any other manner as the parties shall agree. The court finds that the plaintiff's pension increased by $101,974 during the marriage. In addition, the plaintiff's Profit Sharing Plan substantially increased during the course of the marriage. 3. Alimony The plaintiff is awarded periodic alimony in the amount of $1.00 per year for a period of four


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall

Donald Hall v. Mary Hall Date: 1993-04-20. Machine-draft public headnote: Donald Hall v. Mary Hall 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.


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall

QDRO: to effect this order with the U.S. Dept. of CT Page 3806 Defense Center (c.f. Defendant's Exhibit #1), within the time limited to do so after entry of this judgment. The court orders 50% of the plaintiff's pension awarded and assigned to the defendant via a qualified domestic relations order so that 50% of the plaintiff's pension accrued to date is paid to the defendant as an alternate payee. The plaintiff is ordered to cooperate in the preparation of the QDRO. The plaintiff is ordered to maintain the two minor children on his U.S. government $50,000 life insurance policy until both minors have reached 18. The court assigns ownership of the


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall

pension: the parties' marriage that took place on March 17, 1960. The defendant's counterclaim is dismissed as now moot. The plaintiff joined the Army in 1958 and after serving for 20 years, 26 days, was discharged on September 1, 1978. He now receives retired pay (pension) of $218 weekly gross and $188 net taxes. He has been employed by the Coca Cola Bottling Co. since August 9, 1980 where he has a vested retirement fund valued at $5,000. The plaintiff exercised his one opportunity to withdraw a lump sum in 1989. After retiring from the U.S. Army, the plaintiff attended Mattatuck Community College and then Western Connecticu


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall

alternate payee: mited to do so after entry of this judgment. The court orders 50% of the plaintiff's pension awarded and assigned to the defendant via a qualified domestic relations order so that 50% of the plaintiff's pension accrued to date is paid to the defendant as an alternate payee. The plaintiff is ordered to cooperate in the preparation of the QDRO. The plaintiff is ordered to maintain the two minor children on his U.S. government $50,000 life insurance policy until both minors have reached 18. The court assigns ownership of the 1981 Chevrolet to the plaintiff and he shall be solely responsible for any taxes due on it. The cou


Donald Hall v. Mary Hall

domestic relations order: this order with the U.S. Dept. of CT Page 3806 Defense Center (c.f. Defendant's Exhibit #1), within the time limited to do so after entry of this judgment. The court orders 50% of the plaintiff's pension awarded and assigned to the defendant via a qualified domestic relations order so that 50% of the plaintiff's pension accrued to date is paid to the defendant as an alternate payee. The plaintiff is ordered to cooperate in the preparation of the QDRO. The plaintiff is ordered to maintain the two minor children on his U.S. government $50,000 life insurance policy until both minors have reached 18. The court assigns ownership of the


Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.

Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz. Date: 2000-06-13. Machine-draft public headnote: Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz. 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.


Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.

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.


Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.

QDRO: her employer. ATTY. CAISSE: I must have missed that, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's okay, that's fine. Mr. Traystman? ATTY. TRAYSTMAN: Your Honor, I have just two questions. I'm hoping the Court will retain jurisdiction over the terms of the allotment or QDRO. THE COURT: Absolutely. For purposes of their effectuations in accordance with the tenor of the orders. Thank you. ATTY. TRAYSTMAN: And I should defer to Atty. Lenes but it's my understanding that the military will not allow the allotment unless it's done by percentage as opposed to amount, that is my understanding, I may be wrong. ATTY. LENES: That's


Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.

pension: r at least that was the basis he told her. The tax liability that was paid off by the thirty-four thousand dollar debt was a result of Mr. Konz not having proper receipts from his deductions to present at an audit by the Federal Government. Mr. Konz has a pension that he receives from the Navy which provides somewhere in the neighborhood of about two hundred and seventy-eight dollars per week, or, rounded off, about twelve hundred dollars a month. He has been receiving it since his retirement in 1996. Before the parties' separation those funds were used to pay the mortgage and Mrs. Konz paid every other household bi


Donald Konz v. Lorna Konz.

401(k): and two hundred dollars for checking; Liberty Bank savings has forty-two dollars; L and M Employee Credit Union checking and savings of five hundred and forty-seven dollars. There is a transferred L and M defined benefit pension plan, which transferred into a 401K, has an accumulative total value, the Court finds, of twenty-two thousand one hundred and eighty-seven dollars, and another 401K benefit of Ms. Konz' of seven hundred and seventy-five dollars. CT Page 7176 There is indebtedness; mortgage indebtedness of a hundred and four thousand dollars, the home equity loan of about thirty-four thousand dollars, credit


Donald N. Campbell, Jr. v. Karen A. Campbell Date: 1996-10-22. Machine-draft public headnote: Donald N. Campbell, Jr. v. Karen A. Campbell 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: pay the sum of $10 per week to the State of Connecticut on the support arrearage. He is to hold the defendant harmless on that arrearage. 9. The defined pension plan that the plaintiff has with Pitney Bowes is ordered divided equally between the parties by QDRO. The plaintiff is to prepare the QDRO. The court retains jurisdiction over any dispute that may arise involving the language of the QDRO. E. BY WAY OF ATTORNEY'S FEES 1. No attorney's fees are awarded in favor of either party. F. MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS 1. The parties are to exchange copies of their federal and state income tax returns within thirty da


retirement benefits: ng: (a) vacation, twenty days per year; (b) sick leave, six days per year; (c) holidays, twelve days per year; (d) one personal day per year; (e) $50,000 life insurance; and (f) health and dental insurance. The plaintiff is presently 100 percent vested in his retirement plan, having commenced employment with Pitney Bowes on March 28, 1979. His accrued benefit, payable at age sixty-five on April 1, 2025, his normal retirement date, is approximately $436.76 per month as a life annuity, or $401.82 per month as a 50 percent joint and survivor' annuity. The employer pays the entire cost of the plan. The plan does not allow distribut


pension: ekly income is $580. His net weekly income is $433, as shown on the child support guideline worksheet submitted on his behalf. The cost of his therapy treatment is approximately $15 weekly to him. He started working at Pitney Bowes on March 28, 1979. He has a pension plan at Pitney Bowes in which benefits will not commence until he reaches age sixty-five. His financial affidavit shows a deduction of $54 weekly for credit union. That is a deduction that is put into his savings account. He has a balance in his credit union savings account of approximately $250. When the parties separated in March of 1995, there was a cred


valuation/division: ndant has approximately eighteen months of state assistance benefits that are remaining. This court has considered the provisions of § 46b-82 regarding the issue of alimony, and has considered the provisions of § 46b-81 (c) regarding the issue of property division, and has considered the provisions of § 46b-56 and § 46b-56a regarding the issues of custody, joint custody and visitation, and has considered the provisions of § 46b-84 and the child support guidelines regarding the issue of support, and has considered the provisions of § 46b-62 regarding the issue of attorney's fees. The court enters t


Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.

Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns. Date: 2001-01-24. Machine-draft public headnote: Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns. 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.


Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.


Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.

QDRO: wife desires to obtain this coverage she shall be responsible for payment of the premiums. The husband shall assign to the wife one-half of his TIAA/CREF retirement plan valued as of the date of this judgment. The court shall retain jurisdiction to issue a qualified domestic relations order if necessary to effectuate this order. The husband shall pay and hold the wife harmless from the joint indebtedness to the Internal Revenue Service. Based upon the Stipulation of the parties in open court, the court will make no further orders regarding the liabilities of the parties since the husband has recently filed bankruptcy and the wife expects t


Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.

retirement benefits: plaintiff shall make available, through his employer, health insurance for the wife under COBRA. If the wife desires to obtain this coverage she shall be responsible for payment of the premiums. The husband shall assign to the wife one-half of his TIAA/CREF retirement plan valued as of the date of this judgment. The court shall retain jurisdiction to issue a qualified domestic relations order if necessary to effectuate this order. The husband shall pay and hold the wife harmless from the joint indebtedness to the Internal Revenue Service. Based upon the Stipulation of the parties in open court, the court will make no furt


Donald Stearns v. Debra C. Stearns.

domestic relations order: res to obtain this coverage she shall be responsible for payment of the premiums. The husband shall assign to the wife one-half of his TIAA/CREF retirement plan valued as of the date of this judgment. The court shall retain jurisdiction to issue a qualified domestic relations order if necessary to effectuate this order. The husband shall pay and hold the wife harmless from the joint indebtedness to the Internal Revenue Service. Based upon the Stipulation of the parties in open court, the court will make no further orders regarding the liabilities of the parties since the husband has recently filed bankruptcy and the wife expects t


Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey

Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey Date: 1991-11-08. Machine-draft public headnote: Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey 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.


Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey


Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey

QDRO: pay his share directly to the plaintiff and plaintiff shall pay the credit union directly. Each shall hold the other harmless from their respective share of the debt. 8. As a property settlement, the husband shall assign the sum of $25,000 from his SSIP by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to be prepared by counsel for plaintiff and submitted to the Court for its approval. 9. Except as otherwise provided herein, each of the parties shall be responsible for their own liabilities and shall hold the other harmless. 10. All other assets except as herein provided shall be retained by the party owning the same. CT Page 9983 11. The 199


Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey

pension: parties in the following evaluation by the Court. The Court finds that the gross assets of the parties consist of the following: a. SSIP value — $68,740 less $12,730 paid to Keith Claffey $56,010 b. Equity in real estate $50,000 c. Present value of pension $16,226 -------- $122,236 The Court does not accept the argument that the real estate should be valued by using the 17 Huntington Way, Ledyard, Connecticut, property. The wife was justified in attempting to reduce the mortgage payment so as to improve the cash flow. Having taken into consideration all of the testimony, exhibits and mandates of Connectic


Donna Claffey v. Robert Claffey

domestic relations order: hare directly to the plaintiff and plaintiff shall pay the credit union directly. Each shall hold the other harmless from their respective share of the debt. 8. As a property settlement, the husband shall assign the sum of $25,000 from his SSIP by Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to be prepared by counsel for plaintiff and submitted to the Court for its approval. 9. Except as otherwise provided herein, each of the parties shall be responsible for their own liabilities and shall hold the other harmless. 10. All other assets except as herein provided shall be retained by the party owning the same. CT Page 9983 11. The 199


Donna K. Nebelkopf v. Edwin E. Nebelkopf Date: 1998-12-11. Machine-draft public headnote: Donna K. Nebelkopf v. Edwin E. Nebelkopf 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.


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.


QDRO: l time level. Nonetheless, this is a marital asset which has increased in value during the course of this marriage, and the plaintiff is entitled to benefit from it. In light of all the other circumstances and other financial orders, the defendant will give a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to the plaintiff for an amount equal to 10% of the present value of his pension account. (The current value as shown on his financial affidavit is $80000). Medical Insurance: The plaintiff shall be solely responsible for her health insurance premiums which may be available to her under COBRA provisions. Taxes: The defendant shall be responsible


retirement benefits: sary to assign any right title and interest on the account being retained by the other. Pension: The defendant has a retirement or pension plan with the State of Connecticut. The plaintiff has a TIAA/CREF plan with a present value of $3400. The defendant's retirement plan is based on 60% of his salary over his highest three years of earnings. It is estimated that when he retires he would get approximately $45000 annually. The plaintiff is seven years younger than the defendant and, with a Master's Degree, she expects to continue in the teaching profession, but at a full time level. Nonetheless, this is a marital asset which


pension: y settlement within 30 days. The parties shall otherwise keep their own bank CT Page 14371 accounts, C.D.'s, IRA, and Kemper funds. They shall execute any documents necessary to assign any right title and interest on the account being retained by the other. Pension: The defendant has a retirement or pension plan with the State of Connecticut. The plaintiff has a TIAA/CREF plan with a present value of $3400. The defendant's retirement plan is based on 60% of his salary over his highest three years of earnings. It is estimated that when he retires he would get approximately $45000 annually. The plaintiff is seven years


domestic relations order: el. Nonetheless, this is a marital asset which has increased in value during the course of this marriage, and the plaintiff is entitled to benefit from it. In light of all the other circumstances and other financial orders, the defendant will give a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to the plaintiff for an amount equal to 10% of the present value of his pension account. (The current value as shown on his financial affidavit is $80000). Medical Insurance: The plaintiff shall be solely responsible for her health insurance premiums which may be available to her under COBRA provisions. Taxes: The defendant shall be responsible


Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin

Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin Date: 1998-12-21. Machine-draft public headnote: Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin 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.


Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin


Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin

QDRO: appropriate homeowner's insurance on said premises and shall use reasonable care in maintaining the fair market value of said premises during the period of said mortgage. B. PERSONAL PROPERTY 1. PENSIONS (A) The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order twenty (25%) per cent of the value of his pension from the Borough of Naugatuck. Said conveyance shall be effectuated within 90 days of the date of this judgment. (B) The plaintiff shall her interest in and to her pension. 2. MISCELLANEOUS PERSONALTY The parties shall divide equally the household contents and other person effects and, except as otherw


Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin

pension: f Naugatuck as a construction inspector throughout the marriage. His financial affidavit indicates that his gross weekly income at the time of trial was $654.00, which netted him approximately $505.00 per week after allowable deductions. He testified that the pension he has with the Borough of Naugatuck will pay him $1800.00 per month at age 65, based upon his last three income years. The testimony permitted a finding that throughout the marriage the defendant abused alcohol and on more than one occasion received medical treatment for that condition. It was a major reason for the temporary separation of the parties on


Donna M. Kerwin v. James F. Kerwin

domestic relations order: e homeowner's insurance on said premises and shall use reasonable care in maintaining the fair market value of said premises during the period of said mortgage. B. PERSONAL PROPERTY 1. PENSIONS (A) The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff by Qualified Domestic Relations Order twenty (25%) per cent of the value of his pension from the Borough of Naugatuck. Said conveyance shall be effectuated within 90 days of the date of this judgment. (B) The plaintiff shall her interest in and to her pension. 2. MISCELLANEOUS PERSONALTY The parties shall divide equally the household contents and other person effects and, except as otherw


Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.

Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr. Date: 1994-12-16. Machine-draft public headnote: Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, 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.


Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.


Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.

QDRO: be turned over to the plaintiff for sale. The defendant is ordered to inform the plaintiff of the sale, the amount of the sale, and the name and address of the purchaser no less that seven (7) business days prior to that sale. The plaintiff shall receive by Qualified Domestic Relations Order the entire balance of the defendant's pension. The lawn tractor shall be sold and the proceeds shall be applied to the arrearage in child support, first to the State of Connecticut, as its interest may appear, and then to the plaintiff. The court finds that child support and alimony arrearage to be Six Thousand Eight Hundred Ten ($6,810.00) Dollars. Pay


Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.

pension: orm the plaintiff of the sale, the amount of the sale, and the name and address of the purchaser no less that seven (7) business days prior to that sale. The plaintiff shall receive by Qualified Domestic Relations Order the entire balance of the defendant's pension. The lawn tractor shall be sold and the proceeds shall be applied to the arrearage in child support, first to the State of Connecticut, as its interest may appear, and then to the plaintiff. The court finds that child support and alimony arrearage to be Six Thousand Eight Hundred Ten ($6,810.00) Dollars. Payments on the arrearage shall be Twenty ($20.00


Doreen Cisero v. Ronald Cosero, Jr.

domestic relations order: over to the plaintiff for sale. The defendant is ordered to inform the plaintiff of the sale, the amount of the sale, and the name and address of the purchaser no less that seven (7) business days prior to that sale. The plaintiff shall receive by Qualified Domestic Relations Order the entire balance of the defendant's pension. The lawn tractor shall be sold and the proceeds shall be applied to the arrearage in child support, first to the State of Connecticut, as its interest may appear, and then to the plaintiff. The court finds that child support and alimony arrearage to be Six Thousand Eight Hundred Ten ($6,810.00) Dollars. Pay


Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum

Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum Date: 1993-11-04. Machine-draft public headnote: Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum 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.


Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum


Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum

QDRO: husband shall transfer to the wife, free and clear of any liens, one half of the shares of stock that he owns in IBM. The tax refund for the year 1991 shall be divided equally by the parties. The wife shall receive 22% of the husband's pension benefits. A Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall enter giving to the wife said 22% interest therein. CT Page 9559 The husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $20,000.00 for her share in the Tax Deferred Savings Plan accumulated from the earnings of the husband. Each party shall retain the motor vehicle shown on his or her financial affidavit and each party shall be responsible for that portion


Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum

pension: s, therefore, that his earning capacity will shortly be significantly decreased. He has been the financial provider during the entire marriage. The husband entered this marriage with assets including a house (the marital residence), shares of IBM stock, and pension benefits from IBM. At that time, he had been employed by IBM for 13 years. The wife testified that she devoted full time to renovating the house and that she contributed much expertise and labor to enhance the value of the home. The husband claimed that he also contributed his labor and was responsible for the payment of materials and supplies and CT Page


Dorothy Buckwalter-Blum v. Harold Blum

domestic relations order: all transfer to the wife, free and clear of any liens, one half of the shares of stock that he owns in IBM. The tax refund for the year 1991 shall be divided equally by the parties. The wife shall receive 22% of the husband's pension benefits. A Qualified Domestic Relations Order shall enter giving to the wife said 22% interest therein. CT Page 9559 The husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $20,000.00 for her share in the Tax Deferred Savings Plan accumulated from the earnings of the husband. Each party shall retain the motor vehicle shown on his or her financial affidavit and each party shall be responsible for that portion


Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine

Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine Date: 1999-03-17. Machine-draft public headnote: Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine 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.


Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine

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.


Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine

QDRO: ll receive one-half of any amount by which the defendants 401(k) plan increased during the period of this marriage and as of December 31, 1998. The defendant shall cooperate in providing documentation for this purpose. The transfer shall be by cash payment or QDRO at the discretion of the defendant. The remainder of the 401(K) shall be the sole property of the defendant and the plaintiff shall have no claim thereto. LIFE INSURANCE The defendant shall continue to maintain the $90,000 life insurance policy as is available through his employment, with the minor child named as beneficiary thereon, for so long as the d


Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine

pension: he plaintiff at his sole cost and expense as is available through his employment for the maximum duration allowed under COBRA or until the plaintiff shall remarry, whichever event shall first occur. The cost of COBRA coverage at this time is $181 per month. PENSION/401(k) The plaintiff shall receive one-half of any amount by which the defendants 401(k) plan increased during the period of this marriage and as of December 31, 1998. The defendant shall cooperate in providing documentation for this purpose. The transfer shall be by cash payment or QDRO at the discretion of the defendant. The remainder of the 401(K) shall


Doryce Funteral-Fine v. Steven B. Fine

401(k): tiff at his sole cost and expense as is available through his employment for the maximum duration allowed under COBRA or until the plaintiff shall remarry, whichever event shall first occur. The cost of COBRA coverage at this time is $181 per month. PENSION/401(k) The plaintiff shall receive one-half of any amount by which the defendants 401(k) plan increased during the period of this marriage and as of December 31, 1998. The defendant shall cooperate in providing documentation for this purpose. The transfer shall be by cash payment or QDRO at the discretion of the defendant. The remainder of the 401(K) shall be the


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig

Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig Date: 1995-07-27. Machine-draft public headnote: Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig 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.


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig

QDRO: 3,587.00. The Court would order that those assets will be retained by the parties, as shown in their respective financial affidavits. The plaintiff's pension was earned during the course of the marriage and is an asset of the marriage and the Court orders a Qualified Domestic Relations Order be prepared dividing the proceeds of the pension, and it be submitted to the Court for CT Page 7631 approval. The Court will retain jurisdiction over said Order. Each party shall be entitled to receive any beneficiary benefits from the pension from his or her share of the pension if the other dies. This is based upon the pension being evenly split between t


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig

pension: 45. There is also three CD's in the wife's name at Dutch Point Credit Union in the approximately amount of $3,587.00. The Court would order that those assets will be retained by the parties, as shown in their respective financial affidavits. The plaintiff's pension was earned during the course of the marriage and is an asset of the marriage and the Court orders a Qualified Domestic Relations Order be prepared dividing the proceeds of the pension, and it be submitted to the Court for CT Page 7631 approval. The Court will retain jurisdiction over said Order. Each party shall be entitled to receive any beneficiary benefi


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig

401(k): er $18,000 in other investments. Since $39,000 was directly from her mother's estate the Court is not inclined to divide the asset with the husband but would award the total left on the inheritance to the wife plus the other of her investments. There is a CLP 401K in the husband's name in the approximate amount of $70,280.14 and an IRA for $11,543.45. There is also three CD's in the wife's name at Dutch Point Credit Union in the approximately amount of $3,587.00. The Court would order that those assets will be retained by the parties, as shown in their respective financial affidavits. The plaintiff's pension was ea


Douglas Craig v. Audrey Craig

domestic relations order: The Court would order that those assets will be retained by the parties, as shown in their respective financial affidavits. The plaintiff's pension was earned during the course of the marriage and is an asset of the marriage and the Court orders a Qualified Domestic Relations Order be prepared dividing the proceeds of the pension, and it be submitted to the Court for CT Page 7631 approval. The Court will retain jurisdiction over said Order. Each party shall be entitled to receive any beneficiary benefits from the pension from his or her share of the pension if the other dies. This is based upon the pension being evenly split between t


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.

Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne. Docket: from the Stamford Judicial District. It was tried o. Date: 2002-03-13. Machine-draft public headnote: Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne. 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.


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.

QDRO: ch retain their own savings and checking accounts free and clear of the claims of the other party. 11. The defendant is ordered to transfer to the plaintiff 50% of his pensions with Magna Copper Co. and Cargill, Inc. These transfers are to be effectuated by Qualified Domestic Relations Orders as required by the plan administrators. The defendant shall assist the plaintiff with obtaining all necessary documents from the plan administrators and is ordered to sign any documents necessary to effectuate this transfer. The court will retain jurisdiction until such time as the Qualified Domestic Relations Orders have been approved and the pensions equ


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.

pension: nt with Schwab valued at $23,825.16. The CT Page 3315 defendant has an IRA at Salomon Smith Barney with a value of $54,187.50. Some or all of the assets in this IRA are the Nord Resources stock purchased by the defendant. He has an interest in two pensions: a pension from Magma Copper Co. will pay him $1,856.54 at age 65; a pension from Cargill, Inc. will pay him $1,663.48 at age 65. There was no evidence of the present value of these pensions. The defendant has $170,000 of group term life insurance payable to the children as beneficiaries. Additional group life insurance in an amount of not less than $500,000 is prov


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.

domestic relations order: their own savings and checking accounts free and clear of the claims of the other party. 11. The defendant is ordered to transfer to the plaintiff 50% of his pensions with Magna Copper Co. and Cargill, Inc. These transfers are to be effectuated by Qualified Domestic Relations Orders as required by the plan administrators. The defendant shall assist the plaintiff with obtaining all necessary documents from the plan administrators and is ordered to sign any documents necessary to effectuate this transfer. The court will retain jurisdiction until such time as the Qualified Domestic Relations Orders have been approved and the pensions equ


Elaine Champagne v. John F. Champagne.

valuation/division: it had been paid to him rather than being accrued. It is not fair to the plaintiff that support was paid from marital assets while the defendant can look forward to receiving the accrued salary in the future. The court has taken this into consideration in the property division. The unallocated support payments of $12,000 per month were supposed to be used by the plaintiff to support the children and the family home. It is clear that the plaintiff was not as frugal as she should have been. Her financial affidavit reveals some questionable expenditures. When the plaintiff was receiving $25,000 per month she should have been payin


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley Date: 1996-01-23. Machine-draft public headnote: Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley 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.


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

QDRO: mencing on the date the plaintiff begins receiving said amount and continuing for a period of ten years thereafter, except that such alimony will terminate upon the plaintiff's death or remarriage. The plaintiff will obtain said 10% interest by virtue of this Qualified Domestic Relations Order. 8. The defendant will pay support for the minor children in the amount of 40% of the defendant's vested retirement benefits from the State of Connecticut by virtue of this Qualified Domestic Relations Order. By the Court, Aurigemma, J.


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

retirement benefits: dated October 11, 1995. The following paragraphs replace the existing paragraphs seven and eight and are incorporated by reference into the existing decision: 7. The defendant will pay alimony to the plaintiff in the amount of 10% of the defendant's vested retirement benefits from the State of Connecticut for a period of ten years commencing on the date the plaintiff begins receiving said amount and continuing for a period of ten years thereafter, except that such alimony will terminate upon the plaintiff's death or remarriage. The plaintiff will obtain said 10% interest by virtue of this Qualified Domestic Relations Order. 8


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

domestic relations order: the date the plaintiff begins receiving said amount and continuing for a period of ten years thereafter, except that such alimony will terminate upon the plaintiff's death or remarriage. The plaintiff will obtain said 10% interest by virtue of this Qualified Domestic Relations Order. 8. The defendant will pay support for the minor children in the amount of 40% of the defendant's vested retirement benefits from the State of Connecticut by virtue of this Qualified Domestic Relations Order. By the Court, Aurigemma, J.


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley Date: 1995-10-11. Machine-draft public headnote: Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley 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 B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

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 B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

QDRO: e a substantial pension from the State of Connecticut within one and one half to two years from this date. In order to insure for the support of the children and the financial well being of the CT Page 11807 plaintiff, it is necessary for the court to enter a Qualified Domestic Relations Order for a portion of the defendant's pension. The court hereby issues the following orders: 1. A dissolution of the marriage is granted. 2. The Agreement between the parties dated July 27, 1995 concerning custody and visitation is hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this judgment. A copy of that Agreement is attached hereto as exhibit A an


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

retirement benefits: ote or other obligation which it secures. 5. The defendant shall hold the plaintiff harmless from all credit card debt shown on his financial affidavit of July 27, 1995. 6. The defendant is ordered to maintain the plaintiff as the beneficiary of his state retirement benefits until such time as he retires. 7. The defendant is ordered to pay one dollar per year as alimony to the plaintiff until such time as he has fulfilled his obligation to pay and hold the plaintiff wife harmless from the Mortgage referred to in paragraph 4 hereof. 8. The plaintiff will receive as a property settlement 50% of the defendant's vested retirem


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

pension: ntiff did not work outside the home for a substantial portion of the marriage because she was caring for the children. The defendant is now disabled and has no ability to support the children. However, the defendant will be eligible to receive a substantial pension from the State of Connecticut within one and one half to two years from this date. In order to insure for the support of the children and the financial well being of the CT Page 11807 plaintiff, it is necessary for the court to enter a Qualified Domestic Relations Order for a portion of the defendant's pension. The court hereby issues the following orders


Elizabeth B. Riley v. Michael E. Riley

domestic relations order: ntial pension from the State of Connecticut within one and one half to two years from this date. In order to insure for the support of the children and the financial well being of the CT Page 11807 plaintiff, it is necessary for the court to enter a Qualified Domestic Relations Order for a portion of the defendant's pension. The court hereby issues the following orders: 1. A dissolution of the marriage is granted. 2. The Agreement between the parties dated July 27, 1995 concerning custody and visitation is hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this judgment. A copy of that Agreement is attached hereto as exhibit A an


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer Date: 1996-04-04. Machine-draft public headnote: Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer 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 C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

QDRO: 9. The plaintiff is not awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporation. 12. The real property at 15 Duck Hole Road, Guilford, at 165 Sperry Drive, Guilford, and at 257 Brown


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

pension: s a result of the settlement of the strike at Star Distributors. 9. The plaintiff is not awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporation. 12. The r


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

domestic relations order: aintiff is not awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporation. 12. The real property at 15 Duck Hole Road, Guilford, at 165 Sperry Drive, Guilford, and at 257 Brown


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

QDRO: ff is not awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The CT Page 3427-F plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporation. 12. The real property at 15 Duck Hole Road, Guilford, at 165 Sperry Drive, Guilford, and at 257 Brown


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

pension: s a result of the settlement of the strike at Star Distributors. 9. The plaintiff is not awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The CT Page 3427-F plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporati


Elizabeth C. Dwyer v. William L. Dwyer

domestic relations order: awarded any interest in the personal injury claim presently being pursued by the defendant. 10. The plaintiff is awarded one-half the current value of the defendant's pension through the Teamster's Union. The CT Page 3427-F plaintiff shall draft a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to effectuate this award. The draft shall be submitted to the defendant and the plan administrator for their review and to the court for its approval. 11. The defendant is not awarded any interest in the plaintiff's pension from BIC Corporation. 12. The real property at 15 Duck Hole Road, Guilford, at 165 Sperry Drive, Guilford, and at 257 Brown