In Re Marriage of Marshall

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 671·36 Cal. App. 4th 1170·43 Cal. Rptr. 2d 38·95 Daily Journal DAR 9588·19 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2629
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 19, 1995A067400California1,670 words

Opinion

Opinion

Strankman, J.

In a postdissolution proceeding, respondent John A. Marshall, Jr. (husband) was ordered to pay appellant Suzanne F. Marshall (wife) $34,966.43 as reimbursement for federal taxes and related costs incurred when she was assessed for a tax liability husband assumed under the dissolution judgment but failed to satisfy. In an effort to enforce the order, wife tried to garnish husband’s retirement benefits payable under a pension plan confirmed as his separate property and governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ( 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.) (ERISA) which generally forbids garnishment. The trial court refused to issue a qualified domestic relations order (§ 1056(d)(3)(A), (B)) (QDRO, commonly called a “quadro”), which is an exception to ERISA’s garnishment proscription. Wife appealed, We hold that the enforcement of a collateral, contingent tax liability in a dissolution judgment does not relate to the provision of marital property rights within the meaning of a QDRO and is insufficient grounds to defeat ERISA’s general garnishment proscription. The court’s order denying issuance of a QDRO is affirmed.

Facts

The parties were divorced on June 29, 1988,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.