Husband Gets 27% of Wife’s Teacher Pension as Agreed
Tennessee case summary on pension and retirement division in divorce.
Robert Martin Thompson v. Christie Lee Thompson
Husband Gets 27% of Wife’s Teacher Pension as Agreed
For more discussion of this case, and the financial principles involved, see Rob Vance’s guest blog, Application of the Coverture Fraction to a Deferred Distribution of a Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (“TCRS”) Pension Plan.
The husband in this Putnam County, Tennessee, case filed for divorce after 22 years of marriage. Both spouses had worked during most of the marriage as public educators, and had accumulated benefits through the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System, and the pension accounts constituted their main asset. The wife’s account had a present value of about $365,000, and the husband’s, about $115,00, neither of which were vested.
By the time of hearing, the parties had resolved most issues. With respect to the pension, because the wife’s account was larger, but she had no liquid assets, they agreed that the husband would receive a coverture percentage of 27% of the wife’s pension, via a deferred distribution method. To avoid further litigation, they asked the court to determine the language needed to implement the agreement. Under the final order, the husband was to receive 27% of any future payment from the account, to be paid directly to husband.
The wife objected, since this would entitle the husband to a portion of any future increase in value of the pension. This motion was denied, and she appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The appeals court noted that the original agreement was that husband would receive 27% “of the marital portion” of the pension. However, it also noted that the trial court had stated the general terms of the final order, and neither party had objected.
The appeals court noted that the percentage had been derived by the portion of time the wife’s employment was during the marriage. After analyzing the order, the appeals court concluded that the formula used did, indeed, reflect the parties’ agreement. It pointed out that the final value of the asset is not known, and that the husband will receive 27% of the marital portion, and that cannot be computed until after the wife retires, and her total length of service is known.
Since the order was consistent with the parties’ agreement, and also with Tennessee law, the Court of Appeals affirmed. It declined, however, to award the husband his attorney’s fees for the appeal.
No. M2020-01293-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2022).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce and view our video Is Tennessee a 50 50 divorce state?
