Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re the Marriage of Benson

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided March 20, 1996No. 94-1304Published

1DissentLavorato, Justice

I dissent to division I and II of the majority’s opinion.

The majority states the issue this way:

The unresolved question is the time at which we are to set the “value” of the benefit for purposes of calculating the equation: the vested value accrued at the time of dissolution (i.e., the amount the pensioner would be entitled to receive if he or she were to retire immediately and begin drawing benefits) or the value accrued at maturity (i.e., the amount the pensioner actually receives when he or she finally begins to draw benefits — generally at retirement).

The majority thinks the value should…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Berry v. BerryTexas Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Berrington v. BerringtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. In Re the Marriage of GriffinCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1984
  4. Ruggles v. RugglesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  5. In Re the Marriage of MuelhauptSupreme Court of Iowa · 1989

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API