NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only

  • 1.  Non-Employee's share of pension as income for alimony

    Posted 07-19-2018 11:31 AM

    I have a case in Bergen County where my husband/client just retired from the police department. Former's wife's distribution is substantial ($47k). The new alimony statute reads:  

        "The assets distributed......shall not be considered by the court for purposes of determining the obligor's ability to pay alimony following retirement"

    My adversary maintains that it also applies to the oblige and he won't take it into consideration in negotiating a new alimony.

     Anyone know of any cases on point?

    Thank you.

    Arlene F. Albino, Esq.

    Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers

    Certified Matrimonial Law Attorney

     

    Albino & Clark, LLC

    Attorneys at Law

    10 Poplar Tree Lane

    Sparta, New Jersey 07871

    (973) 729-3888

    (973) 729-4167 Facsimile

     

    Confidentiality Note:

    This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information.  No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission. If you receieve this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient.

     



  • 2.  RE: Non-Employee's share of pension as income for alimony

    Posted 07-19-2018 12:17 PM
    Snippet from brief. If Husband is receiving disability from PFRS, remember it's tax-free. Hope this helps:

    <x-tab>        </x-tab>When determining incomes, a court cannot consider income to a payor spouse attributable to that portion of a pension distributed in equitable distribution. Doing so would constitute "double dipping" as the payee spouse has already received her share of the pension in equitable distribution, and is prohibited both by statute and case law. See N.J.S.A. 2A:3423 (insulating that portion of a pension subject to equitable distribution); Innes v. Innes, 117 N.J. 496, 504 (1990).
    <x-tab>        </x-tab>However, it is equally indisputable that "the portion of the pension not deemed to be a marital asset will be available for alimony." Sternesky v. SalcieSternesky, 396 N.J. Super. 290, 30809 (App. Div. 2007). Defendant receives a tax-free $13,668 per year from the portion of his pension that was not distributed (Exhibit H: 4,436-3,297= 1,139 x 12). Adjusted for taxes, this would equate to gross earnings of $17,495 per year (13,668 x 1.28).


    <x-sigsep>

    David Perry Davis, Esq.
    ----------------------------------------------------
    www.FamilyLawNJ.pro
    ----------------------------------------------------
    57 Hamilton Avenue -- Suite 301
    Hopewell, NJ 08525
    Voice: 609-466-1222
    Fax: 609-466-1223

    </x-sigsep>



    Original Message