In Re Marriage of Shattuck

In a marriage dissolution action the wife, Doris, appeals from a “Judgment re Division of Pension Funds After Interlocutory Decree of Dissolution of Marriage.”

Doris, and the husband, Karl, were employed by the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company. Each was a beneficiary of the company’s employees’ pension plan. Doris’ pension rights at the time of the trial had vested but not matured, while Karl’s such rights were both vested and matured. Neither party was obliged to retire, and neither had plans to do so until required by the company’s rules.

The judgment, as relevant, stated:

The parties now agree (we think correctly) that their respective interests in the retirement benefits should have been determined as provided by In re Marriage of Judd (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 515, 522 [ 137 Cal.Rptr. 318 ], and In re Marriage of Freiberg (1976) 57 Cal. App.3d 304, 310 [ 127 Cal.Rptr. 792 ] (disapproved on other grounds in In re Marriage of Gillmore (1981) 29 Cal.3d 418, 425, fn. 5 [ 174 Cal.Rptr. 493 , 629 P.2d 1 ]).

Doris states the remaining issue of her appeal as follows: “Whether the court must distribute a vested, matured pension fund to the nonemployee spouse despite the…