Mosley v. Mosley, 84-CA-621-MR
| Citation | 682 S.W.2d 462 |
| Decision Date | 04 January 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-CA-621-MR,84-CA-621-MR |
| Parties | Opal Ruth Mable MOSLEY, Appellant, v. Edwin Fred MOSLEY, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Kentucky |
Steven D. Gold, Sheffer, Hoffman, Neel & Wilson, Henderson, for appellant.
Thomas E. Simpson, Wesley & Simpson, Morganfield, for appellee.
Before COMBS, HOWERTON and LESTER, JJ.
Opal Mosley appeals from a portion of the decree dissolving her marriage with Edwin Mosley, which held that she had no marital interest in his ongoing workers' compensation award and that she was not entitled to receive maintenance. We conclude that ongoing workers' compensation benefits, which have not been received prior to the dissolution of the marriage, are not marital property subject to division. We further determine that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Opal maintenance. Therefore, we affirm the decree.
The parties were married for approximately 45 years. At the time the marriage was dissolved, Edwin was 65 and Opal was 60 years of age. Practically all of the real and personal property belonging to the parties was determined to be marital. All such property was divided equally between the parties after all costs and attorney fees were paid. We are advised that the real property sold for approximately $40,000 and that there was a $25,000 certificate of deposit plus various other items of personal property including vehicles which were sold and divided equally.
The trial court concluded that Edwin's United Mine Workers pension was marital property and ordered that it be divided equally for future payments. However, the court further concluded that future payments for Edwin's workers' compensation black lung benefits were not marital property and would accumulate only for Edwin's benefit. The court also determined that Opal was not entitled to maintenance.
Opal first argues that Edwin's entitlement to the workers' compensation award occurred during the marriage and that it should be considered as marital property. She cites KRS 403.190(2), which indicates that marital property is all property acquired by either spouse subsequent to the marriage with certain exceptions, none of which are applicable in this situation. She also cites Johnson v. Johnson, Ky., 638 S.W.2d 703 (1982), and Quiggins v. Quiggins, Ky.App., 637 S.W.2d 666 (1982), which held that certain workers' compensation benefits were marital property. None of these authorities are dispositive of this case, however. Johnson and Quiggins involved lump-sum awards which were received by the claimant prior to the dissolution of the marriage. In this situation, Edwin received approximately $22,000 in back pay for his black lung benefits, and such payment was included in the marital estate. The question we must decide, however, is the status of the future payments which will accrue and be made after dissolution.
A workers' compensation award differs from a pension. A pension accrues while one is working and, to the extent that it has accrued and is vested prior to the dissolution of a marriage, it must be considered with the marital estate. Workers' compensation benefits are based on something that happened while one was employed and, although the event may have occurred during the time of the marriage, the compensation is awarded to replace the injured or diseased...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Queen v. Queen
...Thomas, supra, 44 Ill.Dec. at 432, 411 N.E.2d at 554. A few common law jurisdictions, however, have held otherwise. In Mosley v. Mosley, 682 S.W.2d 462 (Ky.Ct.App.1985), for example, the court held that the husband's workers' compensation benefits, which had not been received prior to disso......
-
Weisfeld v. Weisfeld
...125 Ariz. 190, 608 P.2d 329 (Ct.App.1980); In re Marriage of Robinson, 54 Cal.App.3d 682, 126 Cal.Rptr. 779 (1976); Mosley v. Mosley, 682 S.W.2d 462 (Ky.Ct.App.1985); In re Marriage of Blankenship, 210 Mont. 31, 682 P.2d 1354 (1984); York v. York, 579 S.W.2d 24 (Tex.Civ.App.1979). Other jur......
-
Marriage of Waggoner, In re
...those which accrued after the dissolution would not be. In support of this contention, Husband cites a Kentucky case, Mosley v. Mosley (Ky.Ct.App.1985), 682 S.W.2d 462, in which the husband was totally disabled and receiving weekly benefits under the Kentucky workers' compensation act at th......
-
Grasch v. Grasch
...to provide for his or her reasonable needs and is unable to support himself or herself through appropriate employment." Mosley v. Mosley, 682 S.W.2d 462, 463 (Ky. App. 1985). Husband argues that this inquiry ends the analysis in the instant case as Wife exits the marriage with gross income ......