Tuesday, March 7, 2006

Case Law Development: Trial Courts May Not Prohibit Bankruptcy or Require Continued Military Service as Means of Enforcing Divsion of Pension

The Florida Court of Appeals reversed a trial court's order regarding Husband's military pension because the order contained language exceeding the trial court's power.  For example, the order provided that husband could not merge his military pesnions with disability benefits, had to remain "an active member of the military until such time as his retirement benefits are fully vested," and could not declare bankruptcy.  The appellate court noted that the court does not have the power to make these orders in a dissolution action.  Moreover, the trial court's order suggested that payments due wife "shall be enforceable by contempt power of the Court" which the court of appeals noted would not be true as the division of the pension is a judgment dividing property, not an equitable order enforceable through contempt.

Oglesby v. Oglesby, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 3041 (March 3, 2006)
Opinion on the web (last visited March 6, 2006 bgf)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/family_law/2006/03/case_law_develo_8.html

Property Division | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d835280e4a53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Case Law Development: Trial Courts May Not Prohibit Bankruptcy or Require Continued Military Service as Means of Enforcing Divsion of Pension:

Comments

Post a comment