Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hinckley v. Hinckley

Court of Appeals of Iowa

February 19, 2014

CINDY SUE HINCKLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JAMES ALLEN HINCKLEY, Defendant-Appellee

Editorial Note:

This opinion is subject to modification or correction by the court and is not final until the time for rehearing or further review has passed.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Washington County, Myron L. Gookin, Judge.A divorced spouse contends a qualified domestic relations order entitles her to an amount specified in the order and not an amount that accounts for investment losses.

Joseph W. Younker of Bradley & Riley, P.C., Iowa City, for appellant.

Leslie D. Lamping of Lamping, Schlegel & Salazar, L.L.P., Washington, for appellee.

Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ.

OPINION

VAITHESWARAN, J.

We must decide whether a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) entitled a divorced spouse to the amount specified in the order or an amount that accounted for investment losses.

I. Background Facts and Proceedings

Cindy and James Hinckley dissolved their marriage. The dissolution decree incorporated a stipulation under which Cindy was to receive $165,746 of Jim's retirement account, to be distributed pursuant to a QDRO.

The QDRO was executed two months after the dissolution decree was filed, and funds were transmitted to Cindy five months after the decree was filed. In the interim, the account value plummeted from $342,139.55 to $220,916.33. Cindy only received $103,981.25.

Cindy filed an application seeking a declaration of the parties' rights under the QDRO and an order requiring payment of an additional $61,844.75. The district court concluded that the amount Cindy received " was proper and correct." Cindy appealed.

II. Analysis

Cindy contends the language governing this appeal appears in a section of the QDRO titled " amount of benefit to be paid to the alternate payee." [1] That section states Cindy's interest in the plan will be " $165,746 of [Jim's] Account Balance as of October 3, 2008" (the date the dissolution decree was filed) and the interest will " be subject to earnings and losses subsequent to October 3, 2008." The QDRO also states benefits will " be ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.