Olivo v. Olivo
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Simons, J.
In these two actions, we are asked to decide whether a woman who is entitled to share in her former husband’s pension is also entitled to share in benefits from an early retirement incentive package accepted by the former husband after divorce. We hold that such postdivorce incentive packages are not marital property, and therefore not subject to equitable distribution, except for the portion of the package that enhances pension benefits payable to the employee. We therefore affirm the order of the Appellate Division in Tan-chick v Tanchick and modify the order…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Majauskas v. MajauskasNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Dolan v. DolanNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Biddlecom v. BiddlecomAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Marriage of Hughes v. HughesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
3Cited by67 opinions
- Burns v. BurnsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- DeJesus v. DeJesusNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- In Re Marriage of LehmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Mesholam v. MesholamNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
- Reichert v. ReichertNebraska Supreme Court · 1994
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.