McNabney v. McNabney

Young, C. J.,

with whom Steffen, J., agrees, dissenting:

The district court classified the annuity as community property subject to disposition. It further found that awarding Laurence eighty percent and Gail twenty percent of the annuity was “just *662and equitable.” However, the district court gave no specific reasons for this distribution. Instead, the court simply stated that it would not be just and equitable to divide the annuity equally.

At the time of the divorce trial, the annuity had a present value of approximately $713,000. By the trial court’s distribution, Laurence would receive…