Focht v. Focht
32 A.3d 668
| Pa. | 2011Background
- Appellee sustained a personal injury in an accident at a Pennsylvania Raceway on April 1, 1999.
- The Focht spouses separated by mutual agreement on August 1, 2001, and filed for divorce in 2004, final in 2009.
- A settlement of the negligence action occurred on November 23, 2004, for $410,000, with net proceeds split (Appellee $231,618; Appellant $14,784).
- During the first year after settlement and while separated, Appellee spent his settlement proceeds, including purchasing a residence secured by a mortgage.
- The residence was later sold in 2007 after foreclosure to satisfy debts, leaving only $60,206 from the settlement after expenses.
- The Special Master and trial court treated all settlement proceeds as marital property; the Superior Court reversed, holding the proceeds were not marital because settlement occurred after final separation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does accrual occur for 3501(a)(8)? | Focht: accrual occurred during marriage; settlement date irrelevant. | Focht: accrual occurs at settlement, not during marriage. | Accrual during marriage controls; proceeds are marital. |
| Is accrual based on the right to sue, not the settlement timing? | Focht: right to sue accrued before separation; thus marital. | Focht: accrual only upon settlement would determine marital status. | Right-to-sue accrual governs marital characterization; settlement timing is immaterial. |
| Did Pudlish misstate the law after the 1988 amendments? | Focht: Pudlish remains valid for pre-amendment law. | Focht: amendments render Pudlish obsolete; accrual-based approach governs. | Pudlish is overruled; accrual-based interpretation governs under 3501(a)(8). |
Key Cases Cited
- Drake v. Drake, 555 Pa. 481 (Pa. 1999) (accrual timing depends on when the right to receive the award accrued)
- Nuhfer v. Nuhfer, 410 Pa. Super. 380 (Pa. Super. 1991) (accrual based on when the right to an asset arises during marriage)
- Pudlish v. Pudlish, 796 A.2d 846 (Pa. Super. 2002) (pre-amendment treatment of settlements; overruled here)
- Bell v. Brady, 31 A.2d 547 (Pa. 1943) (accrual concept originates in injury/claim doctrine)
- Fine v. Checcio, 870 A.2d 850 (Pa. 2005) (accrual rule for limitations periods in Pennsylvania)
- Gleason v. Borough of Moosic, 15 A.3d 479 (Pa. 2011) (general accrual rule for personal injury actions)