Albuquerque Divorce Lawyer Blog

A Qualified Domestic Relations Order ("QDRO") is a specialized order issued by the Court to divide retirement benefits during a divorce proceeding. As a community property state, the law in New Mexico provides that each spouse is entitled to 50% of the retirement benefits earned by the other spouse during the marriage. Retirements benefits can include, among other things, pension plans, deferred compensation accounts and 401(k) plans.

Retirement plans can often be one of the most valuable community assets owned by a divorcing couple and there are different ways to approach division of retirement benefits. As a preliminary matter, the parties must determine the value of the retirement benefit at issues. This determination can be fairly simple as in the case of 401(k) account, which contains a readily identifiable amount of money on any given day. In contrast, the value of pension plans can vary greatly depending on how much the employee spouse is making at the time of retirement and at what age the employee spouse retires. In complicated retirement cases, the parties and their attorneys should think seriously about hiring an actuary or other trained expert to determine the value of the disputed retirement benefit.

After the value of a retirement plan is determined, then the parties (or the Court) must also decide how and when the benefits will be distributed. In the case of some 401(k) plans, the parties can split the account at the time of divorce. In the case of other pension plans, neither party receives their share of the retirement plan until the employee spouse actually retires.

The QDRO should address all of the issues regarding valuation and distribution of retirement benefits. Though it would seem that the valuation and division would be a straightforward mathematical calculation, the division of retirement accounts is often hotly contested. The drafting of the QDRO can be highly contentious. In turn, the QDRO must be submitted to the court for approval and then submitted to the QDRO administrator for its approval. Each plan requires specific language and Orders are often rejected for what appear to be very trivial drafting issues.

There are some QDRO administrators that will review the Order prior to filing with the court. Others require a court approved Order prior to review. In these cases, the Order may take several trips through the drafting process, approval by the Court and final approval by the plan administrator. This process can take a very long time.

In cases where retirement benefits are hotly disputed and the parties cannot agree on drafting, it is often beneficial to have a third party attorney draft the QDRO to reduce the conflict between the parties and their attorneys. Though this will often reduce the conflict and expedite the drafting process, even this step cannot alleviate the conflict in some cases. In those cases, it is often necessary to seek the intervention of the Court. Where this becomes necessary, the parties can be assured that they are embarking on a very expensive adventure.

www.CollinsAttorneys.com

A variety of complicated emotional and legal issues arise when a person dies. And those issues get even more complicated when the deceased is involved in a pending divorce action. Does one party's death end the divorce proceeding? Does the surviving spouse serve as personal representative of the deceased spouse's estate? How does the Probate Code (the body of laws governing the estate of a deceased person) interact with the statues governing Domestic Affairs? The New Mexico Court of Appeals addressed these questions in two 2009 cases.

These questions are very important in a divorce action which is after all a dissolution of marriage. A dissolution of marriage means a division of property and debt. All community property and debt must be divided according to the law. It also means that the separate property and debt must be identified and divided as such. The division of property and debt has significant consequences for the parties. The division may also raise claims by creditors against the community property by creditors including mortgage companies, credit card companies, and even the IRS. As such, the fact that divorce legally survives the death of one of the parties is no trivial matter.

In Karpien v. Karpien, a case that arose in Sandoval County, the wife died during the parties' divorce proceeding which is commenced upon filing the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage. The district court appointed the wife's parents as the personal representatives of her estate (the personal representative is the party in charge of distributing the assets and addressing the outstanding obligations of a deceased person). The husband objected to the appointment of the wife's parents and argued that the wife's death essentially ended the divorce proceeding and that he was entitled to his inheritance as the surviving spouse under the Probate Code. The Court of Appeals disagreed with the husband and ruled that, upon the death of a spouse during a divorce proceeding, the divorce proceeding continues and the personal representative is charged with representing the interests of the deceased spouse.

But what if the will of the deceased spouse appoints the surviving spouse as personal representative? Just this situation arose in a case out of Albuquerque known as Oldham v. Oldham, in which the husband died during a divorce proceeding. The husband's will appointed his wife as the personal representative of his estate, which would have meant that the wife was charged with representing the husband's interest against herself in the divorce proceeding. The Court of Appeals overturned that appointment and ruled that such a situation created an inherent conflict of interest on the part of the personal representative, who in this case was the opposing party in the divorce action. The Court of Appeals sent the case back to the district court with instructions that the district court appoint another appropriate person to serve as the personal representative so that the divorce proceeding could be concluded.

When a family member dies, it is always important to consult an attorney about the probate process. And when that death occurs during a divorce, it becomes even more important to consult an attorney to make sure that all parties involved are compliant with both the Probate Code and the Domestic Relations statutes.

www.CollinsAttorneys.com

Just to make the community property versus separate property distinction even more complicated, sometimes the different types of property can be so intermingled that the property that was once separate becomes community or property that was community can become separate property (although this second example is very rare). This process of mixing property is often comingling or transmutation, which was described in a 1982 case from the Second Judicial Court in Albuquerque, called Allen v. Allen.

The most common way that property is comingled or transmuted is by gift. For instance, in the Allen case, the wife owned a piece of property prior to the marriage, which she later deeded to herself and her husband jointly. The Court ruled that the deed was evidence of the wife's intent to gift the property to the community, which changed the property from separate to community.

However, property can also be transmuted without a document specifically designating a gift, but rather through the actions of the parties. This situation commonly arises with a home owned by one spouse prior to the marriage. Under the basic rules of community property, the marital home would be the separate property of the spouse who owned the home prior to the marriage. However, what often happens is that the mortgage payments for that home are made from the parties' community funds (remember that all income earned during the marriage constitute community funds, even if the parties have separate bank accounts).

The donative intent of the spouse giving the separate property to the community is the key to evaluating whether or not the property was gifted. And without a document specifically identifying a gift, it can be very difficult to prove that intent. These cases may require hiring an outside expert to trace all of the funds applied toward the property, which can be a very expensive process. As with any divorce settlement process, the spouses arguing over possible transmuted property need to balance the value of the property in question against the potentially high cost of proving transmutation.

www.CollinsAttorneys.com