In a Decision – Mason v. Mason, (an "Unreported Decision") >> the Court Held:
The Appellate Division agreed with the trial court that the words "separate interest" in the Divorce Agreement were included to intentionally provide survivorship rights to Wife in Husband's PERS pension and found the trial court's remedy, life insurance naming Wife as an irrevocable beneficiary, was sound.
The parties' marital settlement agreement required defendant to pay permanent alimony and maintain a life insurance policy for plaintiff's benefit. Defendant remarried and submitted a qualified domestic relations order to divide his pension benefits. The former spouse was entitled to survivorship rights under his Public Employee Retirement System pension.
Husband was required to provide life insurance for Wife's benefit because he retired and decided to give his survivorship rights to his new wife in place of Wife. Recognizing that the pension plan does not allow Husband to choose another survivorship beneficiary because 10 A-2378-16T3 thirty days have passed since his retirement start date, the court found that "[t]he only remaining mechanism which the court may order is for him to provide life insurance naming [plaintiff] as irrevocable beneficiary and providing a decreasing death benefit, annually, based on the then present value of funding a lump sum sufficient to provide her monthly benefits should [he] predecease her." We conclude the court's decision is a sound remedy to place the parties in the position as set forth in the MSA; that Wife is entitled to her alimony payments should Husband predecease her.