Estopinan v. Estopinan

I respectfully dissent on two issues.

I

The trial court should not have allowed the former wife to withdraw from her stipulation that the value of the marital home was $102,500 as of 2000, and allow her to present expert testimony that the value of *184the marital home was $94,000 as of 1999 when the valuation date for the former husband’s pension plan (value $281,167) and deferred compensation ($27,229) was set as of the date of the final hearing in 2002. This skewed the equitable distribution in the former wife’s favor as she received the marital home in the equitable distribution. The result was…