Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite Frazier v. Harper, 600 So. 2d 59.
- Langsford v. Firefighters Ret. Sys. 247 So. 3d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
-
Barker v. Barker
137 So. 3d 16
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Our Supreme Court, -6 [3] (La.1992), summarized the basis behind community property law principles surrounding retirement benefits as follows: “(1) an employee’s contractual pension right is not a gratuity, but a property interest owned by him; (2) to the extent that the right derives from the spouse’s employment during the existence
-
Delaney v. McCoy
93 So. 3d 845
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
and Smith v. Smith, 36,910 (La.App.2d Cir.3/14/03), .
- Shirley A. Brouillette v. Kendrick L. Brouillette La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Brouillette v. Brouillette 51 So. 3d 898 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
- Means v. COMCAST, INC. 17 So. 3d 1012 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
-
LA. STATE EMP. RETIREMENT SYSTEM v. McWilliams
996 So. 2d 1036
La. 2008
James & Co., Sims, supra; -63 (La.1992); Johnson v. Wetherspoon, supra ; Bailey v. Bailey, 97-1178 (La.2/6/98), .
- Anzalone v. Anzalone 25 So. 3d 836 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
- Wright v. Wright 770 So. 2d 524 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
-
Sanders v. Sanders
780 So. 2d 390
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
art. 2338; Killgore v. Killgore, 25,673 (La.App.2d Cir.3/30/94), .
-
Fricks v. Fricks
771 So. 2d 790
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
Schexnayder v. Holbert, 98-12 (La.5/29/98)
-
Couvillion v. Couvillion
769 So. 2d 747
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
art. 2338; Bordes v. Bordes, 98-1004, at 3 (La.4/13/99), ; (La.
- Hannan v. Hannan 761 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
- Taylor v. Taylor 739 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
- Bordes v. Bordes 730 So. 2d 443 La. 1999
- Johnson v. Wetherspoon 694 So. 2d 203 La. 1997
- Johnson v. Wetherspoon 669 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
- Edgecombe v. Edgecombe 666 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
- Cahoon v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co. 663 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
-
Goodwyne v. Goodwyne
639 So. 2d 1210
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
James and Co., support a conclusion that because the amount that the defendant was entitled to receive under the CBA was computed using total years of service, the plaintiff is entitled to a proportionate share of the CBA, in addition to the amounts already received under the terms of the QDRO.
- Harmon v. Harmon 617 So. 2d 1373 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
-
Courtney v. Courtney
613 So. 2d 1123
La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
the court considered the nature of a spouse’s intent in an employee pension plan acquired during the existence of the marriage upon termination of the community and concluded that: An employee’s contractual pension right is not a gratuity but a property interest earned by him.