Divorce: Appeal and Error. In actions for
dissolution of marriage, an appellate court reviews the case
de novo on the record to determine whether there has been an
abuse of discretion by the trial judge. This standard of
review applies to the trial court's determinations
regarding custody, child support, division of property,
alimony, and attorney fees.
Divorce: Property Division. The ultimate
test in determining the appropriateness of the division of
property is fairness and reasonableness as determined by the
facts of each case.
___. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2008), the
equitable division of property is a three-step process. The
first step is to classify the parties' property as
marital or nonmarital, setting aside the non-marital property
to the party who brought that property to the marriage. The
second step is to value the marital assets and marital
liabilities of the parties. The third step is to calculate
and divide the net marital estate between the parties in
accordance with the principles contained in § 42-365.
___. As a general rule, all property accumulated and acquired
by either spouse during a marriage is part of the marital
estate. 5. Divorce: Property Division:
Pensions. Only that portion of a pension which is
earned during the marriage is part of the marital estate.
___: ___ . Generally, amounts added to and interest accrued
on pensions or retirement accounts which have been earned
during the marriage are part of the marital estate.
Contributions to pensions before marriage or after
dissolution are not assets of the marital estate.
Social Security: Divorce. Social Security
benefits themselves are not subject to direct division in a
Constitutional Law: Federal Acts: Social Security:
Divorce: Property Division. The anti-assignment
clause of the Social Security Act and the [294 Neb. 205]
Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibit a direct
offset to adjust for disproportionate Social Security
benefits in the property division of a dissolution decree.
from the District Court for Saunders County: Mary C.
H. Sohl for appellant.
J. Krieger and Terri M. Weeks, of Bowman & Krieger, for
Heavican, C.J., Wright, Connolly, Miller-Lerman, Cassel,
Stacy, and Kelch, JJ.
M. Lorenzen appeals from the property division portion of the
decree of the district court for Saunders County dissolving
his marriage to Jennifer Lorenzen. David claims that because
the court determined that Jennifer's future Social
Security benefits should not be considered part of the
marital estate, the court erred when it included a certain
portion of David's pension plan as marital ...