Judgment REVERSED in parties’ divorce case; trial court erred in relying on Virginia cases interpreting Virginia statue to determine that stock options awarded to wife prior to marriage, but which vested during marriage, were akin to deferred compensation and, thus, constituted marital property – Georgia law does not have similar statutory scheme and does not support such bright-line rule; based on overarching principle in Payson v. Payson, 274 Ga. 321 (2001), trial court was required to look at evidence and determine whether vesting of previously awarded stock options directly resulted from “parties’ labors and investments during the marriage” and trial court must inquire as to whether any “appreciation of value of a non-marital asset results from the joint efforts of the parties during the marriage or is the result of market forces;” trial court also ERRED in ruling that portion of wife’s deferred compensation plan account was marital property, since wife created account prior to marriage and made no contributions to it during marriage; that account is wife’s separate property and husband is only entitled to any appreciation in value of account that directly resulted from parties’ labor during marriage;p trial court CORRECTLY found that husband is entitled to portion of $500 contribution, which wife made to premarital IRA account during marriage.
Newman v. Patton, S09F1718 (03/22/2010), 10 FCDR 863
From: Fulton County Daily Report (4/2/2010)