## Facts

- Jeffrey Kamel and Barbara Kamel married and later divorced.
- During the marriage, Jeffrey worked for the Cotton Belt Railroad and earned retirement benefits under the federal Railroad Retirement Act.
- After the divorce, Barbara brought a suit seeking a division of the parties’ community property, including an award tied to Jeffrey’s railroad retirement benefits.
- Railroad retirement benefits include a component that functions like Social Security (federally protected from state division) and other components Congress has allowed state courts to divide in marital property cases.
- In the trial court, the parties did not present evidence identifying which portions of Jeffrey’s railroad retirement benefits fell into the federally protected category and which portions were legally subject to division.
- The trial court nevertheless awarded Barbara a share of Jeffrey’s railroad retirement benefits.
- Jeffrey appealed, arguing federal law barred the award.

## Issues

1. Does the Railroad Retirement Act preempt Texas community-property law so that a Texas court may not award a former spouse any share of a railroad employee’s retirement benefits?
2. If only some portions are subject to division, did the trial court err by awarding Barbara a share without evidence segregating divisible portions from federally protected portions?

## Decision

- The court rejected the argument that federal law preempts all state-law division of railroad retirement benefits; the Act allows division of certain components in a marital property judgment.
- The court held that other components—those equivalent to Social Security—remain protected from state division.
- Because the evidence did not separate divisible benefits from non-divisible, federally protected benefits, the trial court’s undifferentiated award of “retirement benefits” could not stand.
- The appellate court reversed the portion of the judgment awarding Barbara a share of the railroad retirement benefits and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

## Legal Principles

- Federal law limits state-court division of Railroad Retirement Act benefits: portions that substitute for Social Security are not divisible as community property.
- Other Railroad Retirement Act components that Congress has made subject to legal process in marital property matters may be divided under state community-property rules, within federal limits.
- When a retirement plan includes both divisible and federally protected components, a trial court may not award a blanket percentage of the entire benefit without proof identifying the divisible share.
- The spouse seeking a community-property award from mixed railroad retirement benefits bears the burden to present evidence that segregates the divisible portion from the federally protected portion.

## Conclusion

*Kamel v. Kamel* holds that the Railroad Retirement Act does not bar all community-property division of railroad retirement benefits, but it does bar division of the Social Security-equivalent component; because the record did not identify what portion of Jeffrey Kamel’s benefits was legally divisible, the trial court’s general award to Barbara Kamel was reversed and the case was remanded.


Kamel v. Kamel, 721 S.W.2d 450 (1986)