Petitioner's Brief on the Merits - Supreme Court of Texas

More documents

Recommendations

Info

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES STATE CASES Acosta v. Acosta, 836 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. App. – El Paso 1992, writ denied)....................................................................................................................................27 Adams v. Adams, 214 S.W.2d 856 (Tex. Civ. App. – Waco 1948, writ ref’d n.r.e.) .............................................................................................................................27 Albrecht v. Albrecht, 974 S.W.2d 262 (Tex. App. – San Antonio 1998, no pet.)..............................................................................................................................17, 37 Anderson v. Anderson, 707 S.W.2d 166 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ....................................................................................................13, 39 Bankers Home Building & Loan Ass’n v. Wyatt, 162 S.W.2d 694 (Tex. 1942) ............................................................................................................................27 Baw v. Baw, 949 S.W.2d 764 (Tex. App. – Dallas 1997, no pet.) ..................................7, 8, 34 Baxter v. Ruddle, 794 S.W.2d 761 (Tex. 1990) ..................................................18, 19, 20, 32 Berry v. Berry, 647 S.W.2d 945 (Tex. 1983) ...................................xii, 14, 16-20, 38, 40, 42 Bina v. Bina, 908 S.W.2d 595 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 1995, no writ)................................24 Burchfield v. Finch, 968 S.W.2d 422 (Tex. App. – Texarkana 1998, pet. denied).......................................................................................................................17, 40 Busby v. Busby, 457 S.W.2d 551 (Tex. 1970) ..................................................................15, 21 Byrnes v. Byrnes, 19 S.W.3d 556 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth 2000, no. pet)..........................................................................................................................................17 Cameron v. Cameron, 641 S.W.2d 210 (Tex. 1982) .............................................................17 Cearley v. Cearley, 544 S.W.2d 661 (Tex. 1976) ...........................................................15, 31 Coker v. Coker, 650 S.W.2d 391 (Tex. 1983).........................................................................26 Constance v. Constance, 544 S.W.2d 659 (Tex. 1977) .........................................................21 Contreras v. Contreras, 974 S.W.2d 155 (Tex. App. – San Antonio 1998, no pet.)...................................................................................................................17, 24 v
County of Maverick v. Texas Ass’n of Counties’ Worker’s Comp. Self-Ins. Fund, 852 S.W.2d 700 (Tex. App. – San Antonio 1993, no writ).............................................................................................................................26-27 Dechon v. Dechon, 909 S.W.3d 950 (Tex. App. – El Paso 1995, no writ) .................................................................................................................................18, 21 Disbrow v. Thibodeaux, 596 S.W.2d 174 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1980, writ ref’d n.r.e.) ...............................................................................................30 Dunn v. Dunn, 703 S.W.2d 317 (Tex. App. – San Antonio 1985, writ ref’d n.r.e.) .............................................................................................................................17 Echols v. Echols , 900 S.W.2d 160 (Tex. App. – Beaumont 1995, writ denied)................................................................................................................................9, 24 Eggemeyer v. Eggemeyer, 554 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. 1977) ...................................17, 26, 28, 33 Forbau v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 876 S.W.2d 132 (Tex. 1994).................................................27 Grier v. Grier, 731 S.W.2d 931 (Tex. 1987)...........................................................................16 Harrell v. Harrell, 700 S.W.2d 645 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 1985, no writ)..................................................................................................................26, 40 Harvey v. Harvey, 905 S.W.2d 760 (Tex. App. – Austin 1995, no writ) .......................................................................................................................................18 Hatteberg v. Hatteberg, 933 S.W.2d 524 (Tex. App. – Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, no writ)................................................................................................. 7, 8, 9, 34 Haworth v. Haworth, 795 S.W.2d 296 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, no writ)..............................................................................................................24 Herring v. Blakeley, 385 S.W.2d 843 (Tex. 1965)....................................................14, 15, 20 Hurley v. Hurley, 960 S.W.2d 287 (Tex. App. – Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, no pet.) ..................................................................................................................30, 31 Iglinsky v. Iglinsky, 735 S.W.2d 536 (Tex. App. – Tyler 1987, no writ) .......................................................................................................................................34 In re Joiner, 755 S.W.2d 496 (Tex. App. – Amarillo 1988, no writ) ...................................12 Lawrence v. Lawrence, 911 S.W.2d 450 (Tex. App. – Texarkana 1995, writ denied) ...........................................................................................................................19 vi
Page 1 and 2: No. 00-1325 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
Page 3 and 4: AMENDED IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COU
Page 5: III. 2. The court of appeals relied
Page 9 and 10: Reiss v. Reiss, No. 01-0251, 40 S.W
Page 11 and 12: VICTOR B. MEYEN & MARK W. DUNDEE, Q
Page 13 and 14: STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION This Cour
Page 15 and 16: STATEMENT OF FACTS A. The Divorce.
Page 17 and 18: one for the defined benefit plan an
Page 19 and 20: ARGUMENT I. Given the proliferation
Page 21 and 22: earnings less applicable plan expen
Page 23 and 24: Thus, unlike defined contributions
Page 25 and 26: C. To accurately segregate communit
Page 27 and 28: Sequence Marital Property Defined C
Page 29 and 30: e paid to the alternate payee “if
Page 31 and 32: Moreover, such cursory divestiture
Page 33 and 34: of section 9.007 as the basis for i
Page 35 and 36: §§ 9.001-.002. Courts were also g
Page 37 and 38: intended to apply this restriction
Page 39 and 40: Whether the decree is unambiguous i
Page 41 and 42: entirely from non-divorce judgments
Page 43 and 44: [Treadway]. It is further ORDERED t
Page 45 and 46: (court recognizing that accrued ben
Page 47 and 48: Decrees that appear unambiguous whe
Page 49 and 50: This formula preserves marital prop
Page 51 and 52: D. When divorce precedes retirement
Page 53 and 54: In the Marriage, Employment, Divorc
Page 55 and 56: plan participant approaches retirem
Page 57 and 58:
PRAYER This Court should grant Shan
Page 59:
No. 00-1325 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
show all

Petitioner's Brief on the Merits - Supreme Court of Texas

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?