Cornwell v. Cornwell, 309 Neb. 156

Daniel and Melanie married in 1999; Daniel retired from the Maryland State Police in 2010 on a defined‑benefit disability pension that is in pay status and has no lump‑sum buyout provision.
Parties stipulated that 49% of Daniel’s pension is marital property; 51% is nonmarital.
Melanie’s expert (Rosenbaum) produced a present‑value valuation and urged immediate offset; Daniel’s expert (Goss) disputed that valuation and urged a deferred distribution via a domestic relations order (DRO/QDRO).
The Nance County District Court accepted Rosenbaum’s valuation, awarded the pension to Daniel, and required Daniel to make a cash equalization payment of $403,892 to Melanie payable $100,000 per year until satisfied; each party was ordered to pay its own fees.
Daniel appealed the use of the immediate offset method and valuation; Melanie cross‑appealed the court’s refusal to award her attorney fees and costs. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Daniel)	Defendant's Argument (Melanie)	Held
1) Proper method to value/divide pension: immediate offset vs deferred distribution (DRO/QDRO)	Present value is too speculative; deferred distribution should be used so pension payments are split when paid; court must consider whether sufficient equivalent property exists to avoid undue hardship on owning spouse	Immediate offset is appropriate here; Rosenbaum’s valuation is reliable; immediate split avoids manipulation and gives a clean break	Court affirmed use of immediate offset; no abuse of discretion — pension in pay status, present value not unusually speculative, allegations of plan changes and contentiousness supported immediate offset; equalization payment schedule mitigated hardship
2) Award of attorney fees on cross‑appeal	(N/A — Melanie sought fees)	Melanie: Daniel’s litigation conduct was vexatious, dilatory, and frustrated the process, warranting fees	Court affirmed denial of fees; record showed both parties prolonged litigation at times, so refusal to award fees was not an abuse of discretion

Higgins v. Currier, 307 Neb. 748 (2020) (sets de novo on-the-record review and abuse-of-discretion standard for dissolution matters)
Reichert v. Reichert, 246 Neb. 31 (1994) (marital estate includes only portion of pension earned during marriage)
Shockley v. Shockley, 251 Neb. 896 (1997) (contributions before marriage or after dissolution are not marital assets)
Polly v. Polly, 1 Neb. App. 121 (1992) (deferred distribution is the most widely accepted method for dividing retirement benefits)
Koziol v. Koziol, 10 Neb. App. 675 (2001) (discusses valuation approaches including immediate offset and present-value determination)