Marriage of Baggs v. Baggs

2016 OK 117, 385 P.3d 68, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 120, 2016 WL 6752245
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedNovember 15, 2016
DocketCase Number: 111780
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 2016 OK 117 (Marriage of Baggs v. Baggs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Marriage of Baggs v. Baggs, 2016 OK 117, 385 P.3d 68, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 120, 2016 WL 6752245 (Okla. 2016).

Opinion

KAUGER, J.:

¶ 1 The first impression issue on appeal is whether a firefighter’s alternative DROP/ Plan B retirement option is divisible in a divorce, even though the option may or may not be chosen by the firefighter at retirement? 1 Wé hold that in the event the Plan B option is chosen by the firefighter upon retirement, it is divisible to the extent any funds were deposited into it attributable to the marital years.

FACTS

¶2 The petitioner/appellant, Jennifer D. Baggs (wife) married the respondent/appel-lee, Steven J. Baggs (husband) on October 17,1995. The couple had two children together, a daughter and a son. 2 After approximately the first 18 months of marriage, the wife did not work outside the home during the marriage. Rather, she “ran the home,” took care of the finances and the children, and home schooled the children. The husband had been employed with the OHahoma City Fire Department for approximately five years prior to the marriage, and he continued to work there throughout the marriage. He also worked a secondary job as an adjunct instructor at OHahoma State University (OSU) in OHahoma City for nearly a decade during the marriage, and he intermittently did yard and handyman work for extra money as well.

¶ 3 The wife filed for divorce in the District Court of Canadian County, OHahoma on July 8, 2011. In August of 2011, the wife started nursing school at OSU in Oklahoma City in an attempt to become a registered nurse by 2016. She paid for school with loans and grants. The judge held a trial on July 27, 2012. At the beginning of the trial, counsel. for the wife informed the court that the parties had reached an agreement regarding custody of the children, and the husband’s 457 deferred compensation retirement account. Both parties agreed to joint custody of both.children, with the father primary joint custodial residential parent of the girl, the mother primary joint custodial residential parent of the boy, and each parent having standard visitation of the child who was not in their primary custody. The counsel also noted that the court had already signed a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) regarding ■ the deferred compensation account, and that it had already been submitted to the OHahoma City Fire Department pension board.

¶4.⅞6 parties also agreed that the wife would be awarded the marital residence, and that she had already redeemed it from foreclosure by paying nearly $16,000.00 which she borrowed from family members. The remainder of the trial concerned alimony, child *70 support, real property and personal property division, and other financial issues, as well as discussion of the value of the husband’s pension with the Fire Department. In addition to his deferred compensation plan in which the parties had reached a division settlement, the husband, when he chooses to retire, will have the option to make an election between a traditional pension retirement and what is known, as a Plan B or Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP/Plan B) which we detail forthcoming.

¶ 5 The wife sought any portion of the Plan B which might be attributable to the marital years, in the event the husband later decides to chose this retirement option after the divorce is granted. On April 24, 2013, the trial court issued the decree of dissolution of marriage, and awarded the wife of the husbands retirement benefits, but declined to award any interest in a DROP/Plan B option stating:

The Court herein declines to order Respondent to change the current form of the fund since this Court believes that it should not make investment decisions for the Parties, but it is empowered to equitably divide the marital assets as they currently exist.

¶ 6 The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court in so far as the Plan B issue was concerned and modified the trial court's property division. Regarding the Plan B, the appellate court relied on Ballinger v. Ballinger, 2014 OK CIV APP 92, 340 P.3d 644, a strikingly similar case in which the court determined that the Plan B retirement option available to a spouse post divorce is not divisible. The wife appealed on March 2, 2016. We granted certiorari on September 20, 2016, to address the first impression question of the divisibility of the DROP/Plan B option.

IN THE EVENT THE PLAN B OPTION IS CHOSEN BY A FIREFIGHTER UPON RETIREMENT, IT IS DIVISIBLE TO THE EXTENT ANY FUNDS WERE DEPOSITED INTO IT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE MARITAL YEARS.

¶ 7 The wife argues that: 1) the husband became vested during their marriage to be eligible . to elect the Plan B when he retires; 2) if he does elect Plan B, it will then be funded and a portion of those funds are attributable to the pension he accrued during the marriage; and 3) because it was partially accrued during the marriage, it is at least partially marital property.. She also argues that the fact that Plan B is a contingency that the husband has yet to enroll in is irrelevant, and does not cause the loss of its marital character. The husband argues that because there is no Plan B account in existence as of the date of the parties divorce, there can be no distribution to the wife. He insists that there is no reason to require a court to speculate about a contingent future distribution of a non-existent retirement benefit.

A. The DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan)/Plan B.

¶ 8 Title 11 O.S. 2011 49-100.1-143.6. govern the Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System (the System). 3 The eligible retirement date for a member of the System is the date in which the member completes 20 years of credited service or 22 years of credited service plus attainment of the age 50, depending on whether the member’s start date is before or after November 1, 2013. 4 Under the traditional path to retire *71 ment, any firefighter who reaches the retírement date and retires from service, is paid a monthly pension equal to them accrued retirement benefit. 5

¶ 9 An alternative to the traditional route is that a member may elect to participate in what is known as the DROP or commonly called Plan B. Under the DROP plan, in lieu of terminating employment and accepting the traditional retirement pension, 6 an eligible member may elect to defer the receipts of benefits under the plan and continue working, but not continue to increase their years of credible service. 7 Eligibility under this plan is also 20 years of creditable service or 22 years, if employment was on or after November 1, 2013. 8 The duration of participation may not exceed five years and, at the conclusion of participation, employment terminates. 9

*72

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jackie L Bowen v. Mark J Bowen
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2025
CUMMINGS v. SASNETT
2025 OK 7 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2025)
FITZPATRICK v. FITZPATRICK
2023 OK 81 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 OK 117, 385 P.3d 68, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 120, 2016 WL 6752245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marriage-of-baggs-v-baggs-okla-2016.