New York Equitable Distribution

Matrimonial Law in New York relating to Equitable Distribution is the most complex in the United States. In many instances, a court's decision regarding the division or distribution of a single asset can have lifelong financial consequences for the parties. Because New York matrimonial law is constantly changing, it is important to review the most recent, published matrimonial decisions before attempting to answer the question of whether or how a particular asset may be divided and valued by a particular judge. This page offers a synopsis of the most recent decisions entered by matrimonial judges in New York regarding the classification, division and valuation of assets in connection with divorce.

• Swett v. Swett, 89 A.D.3d 1560 (4th Dept. 2011) (Classification; Contribution of Separate Property)
  
  
• Raynor v. Raynor, 90 A.D.3d 1009 (2nd Dept. 2011) (QDRO; Equitable Distribution of Early Retirement Package)
  
  

• Nugent-Schubert v. Schubert, 88 A.D.3d 967 (2nd Dept. 2011) (QDRO; Compensation for Personal Injuries)

• Swett v. Swett, 89 A.D.3d 1560 (4th Dept. 2011) (Classification; Contribution of Separate Property)
  
  In this case, the defendant/wife argued on appeal that the trial court erred in holding that certain trust accounts and stock acquired during the marriage constituted marital property subject to equitable distribution. The Appellate Court upheld the trial court's determination, and cited the axiom that "Property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be marital property and the party seeking to overcome such presumption has the burden of proving that the property in dispute was separate property."
  
  The wife did prevail on appeal regarding another issue. The appellate court ruled that the trial court had erred in denying the defendant-wife a credit toward the separate property that she contributed toward paying off the mortgage on the marital residence with her separate property. The court noted that, "It is well settled that a spouse is entitled to a credit for his or her contribution of separate property toward the purchase of the marital residence". (citations omitted).
  
  
• Raynor v. Raynor, 90 A.D.3d 1009 (2nd Dept. 2011) (QDRO; Equitable Distribution of Early Retirement Package)
  
  In this case, the judgment of divorce (which was entered in 2008) directed that the wife was to receive one-half of the marital portion of the husband's pension. Thereafter, in 2010, the husband accepted an early retirement package from his employer. The court ruled that the husband's early retirement package was "an enhancement to his pension" that was subject to the equitable distribution pursuant to the QDRO (qualified domestic relations order) that had been entered by the court.
  
  The decision in Raynor underscores the importance of carefully drafting a QDRO. In Raynor, the court ruled in favor of the wife based on the QDRO provision which stated that she was entitled to her pro rata share "of any employer-provided early retirement subsidy."
  
  

• Nugent-Schubert v. Schubert, 88 A.D.3d 967 (2nd Dept. 2011) (QDRO; Compensation for Personal Injuries) In this case, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement that provided for the equal division of "any pension" received by the husband. The stipulation was signed before the former husband became entitled to an accidental disability pension. The court ruled that the term "any pension" excluded the portion of the pension that constituted compensation to the husband for his personal injuries. In its decision, the court cited the well established principal in New York matrimonial law that compensation received by a spouse for personal injuries constitutes separate property that is not subject to equitable distribution.