Irwin v. Irwin

Barbara Irwin (plaintiff) and Charles Irwin (defendant) were married for almost 30 years. During the marriage, Charles was a professor at a New Mexico university, and the marital community earned the right to receive pension benefits. Pension-plan participants were entitled to receive a certain amount of money every month upon retirement until death. Alternatively, under a second, “survivor” option, the pension plan would distribute a lesser monthly amount to the participant and distribute the same monthly amount to another designated person for the rest of their lives (option b). In 1988, Charles retired, and the Irwins separated. Barbara petitioned for divorce. In apportioning community property, the trial court ordered Charles to elect option b. As ordered, the pension plan paid about $2,100 a month each to Charles and Barbara. Barbara was expected to live longer than Charles; Barbara had a remaining life expectancy of 21 years, while Charles was expected to live for 17 more years. Charles appealed, arguing that the court erred in ordering a one-half split in the monthly pension distributions. According to Charles, the court’s valuation of pension benefits should have considered Barbara’s greater expected life expectancy and that she would probably receive more than a one-half share in pension benefits over the course of her expected lifetime.