Manning v. Schultz
93 A.3d 566
Vt.2014Background
- Manning and Schultz married in 1992 and had three minor children at the time of divorce proceedings.
- They separated in March 2010; Manning filed for divorce shortly thereafter; two-day contested hearing occurred in 2011.
- Wife worked part-time (~$14,000/year) with health insurance; planned to pursue a master’s degree to boost earnings; husband worked for UVM for over 12 years at about $155,000/year and received a severance after the hearing; his future prospects were uncertain.
- Dispute over assets: Exhibit D valued at about $1,152,325.86, including an $88,158 offset for the difference in projected Social Security benefits; Husband’s asset list totaled $978,504 and did not include the Social Security differential.
- Trial court allowed wife to choose between an 80/20 division (wife/husband) with or without maintenance; wife chose 80% with no maintenance; final judgment entered accordingly.
- Husband appealed claiming the SS differential was improperly treated as marital property or offset; argued federal preemption and trial court’s speculative valuation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Social Security differential can be treated as marital property or offset in division. | Manning contends SS benefits are property-like and usable as an offset. | Schultz argues SS benefits are speculative and not subject to division or offset. | Reversed: SS benefits are not marital property or an offset; remand to apply original 80/20 division. |
Key Cases Cited
- Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603 (1960) (noncontractual, adjustable nature of Social Security rights)
- Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572 (1979) (federal preemption of retirement-benefit division and flexibility to amend)
- Depot v. Depot, 893 A.2d 995 (Me. 2006) (SS benefits not marital property; offsets discouraged)
- Olson v. Olson, 445 N.W.2d 1 (N.D. 1989) (SSA benefits cannot be treated as definable property due to Congress’s discretion)
- In re Crook, 813 N.E.2d 198 (Ill. 2004) (offsetting SS benefits is improper as property distribution)
- McCarty v. McCarty, 453 U.S. 210 (1981) (federal law barred division of military retirement; subsequent changes noted)
- Youngbluth v. Youngbluth, 2010 VT 40 (Vt. 2010) (discussion of federal law governing disposition of retirement benefits)