Jaffe v. Krum

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that parties had been married twenty-three years and that husband had been employed almost fourteen years with his current employer, through which he had a vested pension
• explaining that, when a trial court chooses to deviate from the Hodgins formula, it must state its reasons for doing so and make specific findings and rulings supporting its decision
• court, in the exercise of its equitable powers, need not strictly apply common law formula to value pensions
• explaining method to distribute portion of benefits when actually received
• discussing use of similar method in pension cases
• describing Hodgins as a “default formula”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).