McDonald v. McDonald, 98-3249.
| Decision Date | 21 April 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 98-3249.,98-3249. |
| Citation | 731 So.2d 132 |
| Parties | Paul McDONALD, Appellant, v. Cheryl McDONALD n/k/a Cheryl Cramner, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
A. Thomas Connick of A. Thomas Connick, P.A., and Boutwell and Connick, Deerfield Beach, for appellant.
Howard S. Friedman of Fischler & Friedman, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for appellee.
The parties' final judgment of dissolution of marriage incorporated a settlement agreement. With regard to the husband's municipal pension, the settlement agreement provided that the wife was awarded half of its accumulations during the marriage, and "if a QDRO [Qualified Domestic Relations Order] can be entered upon the pension, it shall be done." Neither the agreement nor the final judgment made any alternative provision if a QDRO was unavailable. As the wife's attorney later learned, a QDRO is unavailable for a municipal pension, a point on which the parties agree. Nevertheless, the pension plan would honor an alternative order, which would be the functional equivalent of a QDRO. The wife presented a stipulated order to that effect, but the husband refused to agree with it. The wife moved to compel the husband to sign the agreement, contending that the arrangement, while not technically a QDRO, was consistent with the parties' intent. The husband appeals the court's order granting the post-judgment motion to compel. We affirm.
The husband contends that the court rewrote the property settlement agreement by requiring him to enter into the alternative order securing payment to the wife of her portion of the pension. He relies on Richter v. Richter, 666 So.2d 559, 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), in which this court stated:
[m]oreover, a separation agreement is a contract subject to interpretation like any other contract. Fecteau v. Southeast Bank, N.A., 585 So.2d 1005, 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). In the absence of ambiguity, the parties' intent must be discerned from the four corners of the document. Id. Where a contract is clear and unambiguous in its terms, the court may not give those terms any meaning beyond that expressed. Id. Thus, the language itself is the best evidence of the parties' intent, and its plain meaning controls. Id.
The problem with the application of the foregoing principle to this case is that here there appears to be an ambiguity in the final judgment and the property settlement agreement. While it unambiguously states that if a QDRO can be entered, it shall be, the settlement agreement does not address what measures may be taken if a QDRO is unavailable. Thus, it does not provide for other means by which the wife may secure that property awarded to her in the final judgment.
As we said in DeSantis v. DeSantis, 714 So.2d 637, 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998):
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Board of Trustees of Orlando Police Pension Plan v. Langford
...not purport to assign federal FSI benefits to wife, in violation of Vizcaino). By contrast, the Fourth District in McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So.2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), held that the trial court was entitled to enter an order which was the "functional equivalent" of a QDRO to effect an e......
-
Berloni S.P.A. v. Della Casa, LLC
..."[w]here there are two reasonable interpretations of an agreement, the question is one for the trier of fact." McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So.2d 132, 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). See also AT & T Wireless Servs. of Fla., Inc. v. WCI Cmtys., Inc., 932 So.2d 251, 255 (Fla. 4th DCA The language of an......
-
Farghali v. Farghali
...the terminology used to transfer the monies from Husband to Wife without changing anything of substance. See McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So.2d 132, 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) ("An order which is the functional equivalent of a QDRO secures those rights to the wife and places the husband in no dif......
-
Anthony v. Anthony
...interpreting, under the circumstances, the phrase "full and complete release" to include the parties' law firms. See McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So.2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in interpreting the parties' settlement agreement which was sus......
-
Qualified Retirement Benefits
...with respect to such participant 19 . 14 26 U.S.C. 414(p)(9) 15 I.R.C. §414(e). 16 I.R.C. §414(d); 414(p)(11). In McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So. 2d 132, (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), the trial court awarded one-half of the husband’s municipal pension to the wife, and the judgment provided that “if a ......
-
Alternative dispute resolution and settlement
...there are two reasonable interpretations of an agreement, the question of what the parties meant is one of fact. [ McDonald v. McDonald, 731 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).] It is within the discretion of the court to determine that the language in the agreement is clear and unambiguous. [ ......