FAMILY LAW
Adam Beyer
In Jordan v. Jordan, 480 P.3d 626 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that a lower court acted in error when it provided a “dollar for dollar” adjustment in a divorce asset distribution for non-divisible property instead of evaluating the financial condition of the parties holistically. (Id. at 638). During divorce proceedings, the superior court calculated an adjustment to the overall division of assets based on the husband’s VA disability pay. (Id. at 630) However, VA disability pay is not divisible by state courts. (Id. at 635) Nevertheless, the superior court adjusted the distribution of other assets to account for the husband’s disability pay to provide the wife a fair distribution. (Id. at 630). On appeal, the husband argued this was improper and that VA disability payments should not influence the equitable division of assets at all. (Id. at 638). The supreme court reversed the superior court’s award to the wife of compensation equivalent to a share of the husband’s VA disability benefits, reasoning that crafting a direct offset to this non-divisible asset is preempted by federal law. (Id.). Yet the court noted that these benefits can be considered for equitable division to assess the overall financial condition of the parties. (Id. at 637). Reversing the lower court’s decision, the supreme court held that a lower court acted in error when it provided a “dollar for dollar” adjustment in a divorce asset distribution for non-divisible property instead of evaluating the financial condition of the parties holistically. (Id. at 638).
