Jose Manuel Ramos-Fantauzzi v. Elizabeth Santa Matos
2064164
Va. Ct. App. UAug 1, 2017Background
- Ramos-Fantauzzi (husband) and Matos (wife) were divorced in Puerto Rico in 2006; husband had military retired pay and had stipulated in the Puerto Rico divorce papers that wife was "eligible" for benefits under USFSPA, 10 U.S.C. § 1408.
- In 2012 the Puerto Rico court entered a "Partial Verdict" concluding Puerto Rico was a forum non conveniens and "authorized" transfer of wife’s pending claim for 50% of husband’s military benefits to Virginia; it did not itself award any portion of retired pay to wife.
- Wife filed the Puerto Rico orders in Stafford County, Virginia under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (UEFJA), Code §§ 8.01-465.1 to -465.5, and moved for a military qualifying court order (MQCO) awarding 50% of the marital share of husband’s military retired pay and a survivor annuity.
- The Virginia circuit court accepted jurisdiction, held an evidentiary hearing was required, denied husband’s motion to reconsider, and entered an MQCO granting wife 50% of the marital share and survivor benefit.
- Husband appealed, arguing the Puerto Rico orders contained no enforceable award of military retired pay (so there was nothing for Virginia to enforce under the UEFJA) and that the Puerto Rico court could not confer subject-matter jurisdiction on Virginia by transferring venue.
- The Court of Appeals reversed: because the foreign orders contained only eligibility language and a transfer of a pending claim—not an actual award—Virginia had no foreign judgment to docket and enforce under the UEFJA and thus lacked authority to enter the MQCO.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Matos) | Defendant's Argument (Ramos-Fantauzzi) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Virginia could enforce and convert the Puerto Rico orders into an MQCO under the UEFJA | The UEFJA permits docketing the Puerto Rico orders; once docketed, Virginia could issue an MQCO effectuating the parties’ stipulation and divide military pay | The Puerto Rico orders did not award any portion of retired pay, so there was no foreign "judgment" for Virginia to enforce under the UEFJA | Held for defendant: UEFJA authorizes docketing/enforcement only of foreign judgments that actually decide rights; here no award existed to enforce, so MQCO improper |
| Whether Puerto Rico’s transfer/partial verdict conferred subject-matter jurisdiction on the Virginia court over the military-pay claim | Transfer by Puerto Rico effectively vested Virginia with authority to resolve the pending claim | A foreign court cannot confer subject-matter jurisdiction on a Virginia court; jurisdiction must arise from constitution or statute | Held for defendant: Puerto Rico’s declination did not establish Virginia jurisdiction; transfer without statutory basis insufficient |
| Whether the trial court properly denied reconsideration and entered MQCO | The trial court correctly interpreted the docketed foreign orders and could effectuate the parties’ stipulation | The court lacked power under UEFJA and statutory jurisdiction to enter MQCO absent an enforceable foreign award | Held for defendant: denial of reconsideration and MQCO reversed; circuit court acted without authority |
Key Cases Cited
- Ghameshlouy v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 379 (Va. 2010) (explaining subject-matter jurisdiction is conferred only by constitution or statute)
- Rogers v. Damron, 23 Va. App. 708 (Va. Ct. App. 1997) (court cannot acquire subject-matter jurisdiction by party consent)
- Gilliam v. McGrady, 279 Va. 703 (Va. 2010) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
- City of Virginia Beach v. Virginia Restaurant Assoc., 231 Va. 130 (Va. 1986) (principle on statutory construction and scope of authority)
- O'Loughlin v. O'Loughlin, 23 Va. App. 690 (Va. Ct. App. 1996) (appellate court reviews attorney's fee requests and frivolous-appeal considerations)