Wife Gets Share of Husband’s Railroad Pension, But Court Must Use Correct Language
Tennessee case summary on pension division in divorce.
Stacy Renee Lofton v. James Warren Lofton
Wife Gets Share of Husband’s Railroad Pension, But Court Must Use Correct Language
This was the second divorce for this Obion County, Tennessee, couple. They were remarried in 2009, but the wife filed for divorce in 2019. She was granted a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct in 2020. The trial court divided unresolved personal property, and held that the proceeds of the sale of their home would be equally divided.
The husband had been employed by a railroad and had a 401k and railroad pension. The wife was awarded 1/3 of the 401k. The railroad pension consisted of both Tier I and Tier II benefits. The trial court held that the Tier I benefits were not subject to division, but awarded the wife 1/3 of the Tier II benefits. The wife was also awarded alimony in futuro of $1000 per month. There were various post-trial motions, and the husband appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the property division and noted that the trial court had great discretion as to marital property issues. Since it saw no abuse of discretion, it affirmed the overall division.
With respect to the pension, the husband pointed to regulations of the Railroad Retirement Board outlining the situations in which a divorced spouse would be entitled to a petition. Since the wife did not qualify under those provisions, the husband argued that the trial court should not have divided the pension. But the appeals court pointed out that there were two separate issues. Even if the spouse were not entitled to her own pension under federal law, due to her status as spouse, the employee’s interest in the pension could still be a marital asset, subject to division by the state court. And in this case, the court held that the division was proper.
The appeals court did note, however, that there had been an error in the lower court’s order. The Railroad Retirement Board requires specific language that obligates the Board to make payments directly to the former spouse, and this language was lacking from the lower court’s order.
For these reasons, the appeals court vacated the lower court’s order and remanded the case for this correction.
The husband also argued that the award of alimony was improper, but the appeals court reviewed this aspect of the case and affirmed.
No. W2020–01349-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 23, 2021).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Property Division in Tennessee Divorce, view our video Is Tennessee a 50 50 divorce state?
To learn more, see Tennessee Divorce Law on Retirement.
