California Supreme Court

In Re Marriage of Brown

January 16, 1976544 P.2d 561

Summary

The court held that nonvested pension rights earned through employment during marriage are contingent property interests, not mere expectancies, and therefore constitute community property subject to division in dissolution proceedings. It overruled the prior rule excluding such rights and held that courts may divide them by valuing the interest or awarding each spouse a share of future payments. The court also limited retroactive application to cases in which marital property rights had not been finally adjudicated or jurisdiction had been reserved.

Holding

  • Classification of nonvested pension rights. Nonvested pension rights are contingent contractual property interests rather than mere expectancies. To the extent they derive from employment during marriage, they are community property subject to division in a dissolution proceeding.
  • Permissible methods of dividing nonvested pension rights. The trial court may determine and divide the present value of nonvested pension rights, or, when uncertainty makes present valuation inappropriate, award each spouse an appropriate portion of pension payments as they are received.
  • Retroactivity of the new rule. The rule applies to cases in which marital property rights have not yet been adjudicated, remain subject to appellate review, or are subject to an express reservation of jurisdiction. It does not permit reopening a final adjudication of marital property rights unless jurisdiction to divide the pension rights was expressly reserved.

Docket L.A. 30463

Cited authorities

  • 9 U.S.F. L. Rev. 635
  • 9 U.S.F. L. Rev. 635
  • 24 Hastings L.J. 347
  • 6 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 26
  • 6 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 26
  • 9 U.S.F. L. Rev. 635
  • 24 Hastings L.J. 347

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF