## Facts

- Jacqueline Mickey and Darrell D. Mickey divorced in 2001.
- Darrell was a Connecticut correction officer and a tier II participant in the state employees’ retirement system.
- The dissolution judgment awarded Jacqueline “40 percent of the defendant’s monthly retirement benefits.”
- At the time of dissolution, Darrell was not disabled and had no present entitlement to disability retirement benefits.
- In February 2002, after the divorce, Darrell suffered a work-related injury that left him permanently disabled.
- Darrell retired on disability in 2003 and began receiving monthly payments that included benefits under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-192p.
- Jacqueline continued receiving 40% of the total monthly payment, including the disability component.
- Darrell filed a postjudgment motion for “clarification,” contending the court could not award any share of disability benefits arising from a post-dissolution disability and that those benefits functioned as wage replacement.
- The trial court denied the motion, effectively treating the disability component as part of the retirement benefits subject to the 40% award.

## Issues

1. Whether disability retirement benefits awarded under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-192p due to a disability incurred after dissolution constitute distributable “property” under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-81.
2. Whether, at the time of dissolution, the possibility of future disability benefits is a non-distributable expectancy rather than a presently existing property interest.

## Decision

- The Connecticut Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s denial of the motion for clarification.
- The court held that disability benefits under § 5-192p based on a post-dissolution disability are not “property” distributable under § 46b-81 at the time of dissolution.
- The court concluded the trial court lacked statutory authority in the dissolution judgment to assign a portion of such future disability benefits.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s holding.

## Legal Principles

- Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-81, a dissolution court’s property-distribution authority extends to presently existing property interests, not speculative future rights.
- A contingent right that depends on a post-dissolution event (such as becoming disabled after divorce) is a “mere expectancy” and not marital property at dissolution.
- Disability retirement benefits awarded due to a post-dissolution disability are characterized as a substitute for post-marital wages rather than deferred compensation earned during the marriage.
- Because post-dissolution wage-replacement benefits fall outside the marital estate, they are beyond the scope of distributable property under § 46b-81.

## Conclusion

The Connecticut Supreme Court held that disability retirement benefits triggered by a disability incurred after divorce are not part of the marital estate and cannot be distributed as property in the dissolution judgment; the trial court’s contrary conclusion was reversed and the matter remanded.


Mickey v. Mickey, 292 Conn. 597, 974 A.2d 641 (Conn. 2009)