Continuing the senior-citizen theme, a recent Colorado decision about social security piqued my interest. A divorce judgment incorporating an agreement of the parties required the husband to pay a portion of his future Social Security benefits to the wife as part of a property division. The husband later moved to set aside this provision of the judgment, the motion was denied, and the husband appealed. The appellate court reversed, setting aside the provision and finding that it violated the anti-assignment clause of the Social Security Act. The court also noted that the anti-assignment clause does not prohibit payments for child support and alimony meaning that better research and creative drafting could have prevented the problem.
In re Anderson, Colo. Ct. App. No. 09CA2592 (December 23, 2010)