ÿWPCÃ; ‚íŒ÷b ^#z-B !Ì Ê>ÎV“ÂjÎC_Súï9eîS'åàr±¢k­ó£ÇkÅ,H½€ßjÀÔªhLÎ…O;¼Ÿ³¹ŸNH„`HWûq‘´ƒèS¡Ë˜"/ÄBhðb¯ª÷ú£’üú ëͺÚ&42Ý& •' úi\Sªè[ÆzÍÝ#%)«ƒRõÐ~ ²Ù ß5ñ#r,§RÙ«ÝÒ¯yjª{×àLsÍå§^±G“6‘ž&—¥ í¥ŠAiûíjølè„ ãqc3©j`ö«V´³|„†Ûª‰"ç±ãGüŠ Rà…brÅÅhÆø5ˆS¦L’.FŒÈàï$·½/ºR]ïB&ñËùØ)è©Âå.Õ¹{âҳỢͭ†’¦.y«©ËwQûWŸ °À²Î•Ÿ¯æ$tNaêë†ïmœR¹ Çß æCd?0϶fØEOn²æÏ“vïæÉ\8EÙW>…îU_x.©š¹Äí«~ÐpMÀÉ÷iZÿœjÞªÏÙ,£öÖÜ^LMšì9>Ò!ý.™{–ù¨”ã˜òYÑ™ÕÈâš…™ßL« ÞOK ÙÕ¼ ×Iíûø„†høûÔ§“ç#Á %Ï ^ Õ 0ˆá UNi w· 4» zÏ ÒI  * m, ¢C ÆåÆ«ÆqÆ7 0DýNA¯C8òE*,, 0ôX 0ñL 0î= 0ë+ 0è 0åþ 0âã 0ßÅ! 0ܤ" 0â€# 0ßb$ 0ÜA% 0Ù& 0Öö& 0ÓÌ' 0П( 0Ío) 0Ê<* 0á+ 0Þç+ 0ÛÅ, 0Ø -bx. 0Õ€. 0ÒU/ 0Ï'0 0Ìö0 0ÉÂ1‹2w“2[ 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0ëe6e6e6e6 BP7P7 0¤m7 D38 D-D8 0Kq8q8 A\¼8Æ9 0¤Þ9 0D‚: A«Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ:Æ: D5q; B¦;˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»wwE)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular ;)bk1ü6  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ˜Ý ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€present€cash€value€method€ð ðrequires€the€trial€court€to€place€a€present€value€on€the€retirement€benefit€asÐ ° Ðof€the€date€of€the€final€decree.€€To€determine€the€present€cash€value,€the€anticipated€number€of€months€the€employeeÐ tÄ Ðspouse€will€collect€the€benefits€(based€on€life€expectancy)€is€multiplied€by€the€current€retirement€benefit€payable€underÐ 8ˆ Ðthe€plan.€€This€gross€benefit€figure€is€then€discounted€to€present€value€allowing€for€various€factors€such€as€mortality,Ð üL Ðinterest,€inflation,€and€any€applicable€taxes.€€Once€the€present€cash€value€is€calculated,€the€court€may€award€the€retirementÐ À Ðbenefits€to€the€employee„spouse€and€offset€that€award€by€distributing€to€the€other€spouse€some€portion€of€the€maritalÐ „Ô Ðestate€that€is€equivalent€to€the€spouseððs€share€of€the€retirement€interest.€€The€present€cash€value€method€is€preferable€ifÐ H ˜ Ðthe€employee„spouseððs€retirement€benefits€can€be€accurately€valued,€if€retirement€is€likely€to€occur€in€the€near€future,€andÐ  \ Ðif€the€marital€estate€includes€sufficient€assets€to€offset€the€award.ðð€€òòCohen€v.€Cohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€823,€831€(Tenn.€1996)Ð Ð  Ð(citations€omitted).€€€€Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ¥Ý ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðAn€employee€has€a€ððòòvestedóóðð€retirement€right€when€the€employee€has€completed€the€requisite€term€ofÐ ° Ðemployment€necessary€to€be€entitled€to€receive€retirement€benefits€at€some€future€time.ðð€€òòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€826Ð tÄ Ð(emphasis€added). .Ý ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðA€ððvestedðð€right€òòmaturesóó€when€an€employee€reaches€retirement€age€and€elects€to€retire.ðð€€òòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2dÐ ° Ðat€826€(emphasis€added). "Ý ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€deferred€distribution€or€retained€jurisdiction€method€is€advantageous€because€ð ðit€allows€an€equitableÐ ° Ðdivision€without€requiring€present€payment€for€a€benefit€not€yet€realized€and€potentially€never€obtained.€€AnotherÐ tÄ Ðadvantage€to€the€approach€is€that€it€equally€apportions€any€risk€of€forfeiture.ðð€€òòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€831€(citationsÐ 8ˆ Ðomitted).2J+M ÿÿ0_level1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2G+M ÿÿ0_level2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2D+M ÿÿ0_level3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2A+M ÿÿ0_level4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>+M ÿÿ0_level5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;+M ÿÿ0_level6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28+M ÿÿ0_level7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25+M ÿÿ0_level8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22+M ÿÿ0_level9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2JM ÿÿ0_levsl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GM ÿÿ0_levsl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DM ÿÿ0_levsl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AM ÿÿ0_levsl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2>M ÿÿ0_levsl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;M ÿÿ0_levsl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28M ÿÿ0_levsl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25M ÿÿ0_levsl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22M ÿÿ0_levsl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2JM ÿÿ0_levnl1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ X ÓÓ2( ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2GM ÿÿ0_levnl2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2DM ÿÿ0_levnl3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ,"¸ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2AM ÿÿ0_levnl4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ) hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó- ù-2>M ÿÿ0_levnl5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ&hhÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó2;M ÿÿ0_levnl6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ#ÀÀpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó28M ÿÿ0_levnl7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓ pÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó25M ÿÿ0_levnl8Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓppÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó22M ÿÿ0_levnl9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓÈÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó  mÝ ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWhile€the€Colorado€Court€classifies€these€post„divorce€enhancements€as€ð ðmarital€property,ðð€we€think€suchÐ ° Ðclassification€is€unnecessary.€The€court€has€simply€divided€the€marital€property€which€existed€at€the€time€of€divorceÔ_Ô.Ô_Ô€€TheÐ tÄ Ðenhancements€follow€the€assigned€marital€property€as€interest€follows€principle.€€Only€the€percentage€of€the€retirementÐ 8ˆ Ðbenefit€changes€with€the€increasing€denominator. QÝ ƒRÆ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€provision€of€Kendrick€considered€in€isolation€is€consistent€with€the€ð ðbright€line,ðð€rule€in€its€strictest€formÐ ° Ðas€exemplified€by€òòBerry€v.€Berry,€óó647€S.W.2d€945€(Tex.€1983).€€(|G2Æ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€O]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôóeò»»Ô d(|3‡$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€O]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`Nþÿ<<Cÿÿ xdðƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€O]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK€€€€)ûÿ!dxdxüÿP PdÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€O]»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼O]»»»ÔÑ8€±XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îUÜO]ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼O]»îîUÜ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJanuary€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X±X»¼O]ÔÌò òÔ#†¼O]»XX±ñ#ÔELIZABETH€ANN€(TIEDE)€CROLEYòòóó€v.€THOMAS€KENT€TIEDEÔ‡X±X»¼O]Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€91„67„423€€€€€€Carol€Catalano,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` AßÐ ¾   ÐÌÒe°Òà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„00649„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€5,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€post„divorce€case€presents€the€single€controlling€question€of€how€to€calculate€an€ex„wifeððsÐ ŒÜ  Ðinterest€in€an€ex„husbandððs€pension€under€the€deferred€distribution€method€where€the€retirement€planÐ xÈ  Ðformula€for€distribution€gives€added€weight€to€post„divorce,€pre„retirement€months€or€years.€WithoutÐ d´ Ðelaboration,€the€trial€court€adopted€the€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula,€treating€post„divorce€pension€benefitÐ P  Ðenhancements€earned€by€a€husbandððs€continued€post„divorce€employment€under€the€retirement€systemÐ <Œ Ðas€applicable€to€the€non„employee€spouse€share€at€retirement.€€For€reasons€stated€herein,€we€affirmÐ (x Ðthe€action€of€the€trial€court.Ð d ÐÓÄÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ ì< ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼O]»àX±n#ÔÔ‡X±X.¼O]ÔWilliam€B.€Cain,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBòòENóó€H.€CòòANTRELLóó,€P.J.,€M.S.,óó€andÐ Ä ÐòòPòòATRICIAóó€J.€CòòOTTRELLóó,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ° ÐÌDenty€Cheatham,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Thomas€Kent€Tiede.Ð ˆØ ÐÌMark€A.€Rassas€and€Julia€P.€North,€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Ð `° Ѐ€Elizabeth€Ann€(Tiede)€Croley.Ð L œ ÐÓZÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼O]»XX±‰#ÔÐ $"t! ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ€X±X»¼O]Ôà ½ àElizabeth€Ann€Tiede,€now€Croley,€(ð ðthe€Wifeðð)€and€Thomas€Kent€Tiede€(ð ðthe€Husbandðð)€wereÐ "$r# Ðmarried€June€16,€1963.€€The€parties€separated€in€September€1989€and€were€divorced€on€grounds€ofÐ %^ $ Ðirreconcilable€differences€on€December€18,€1992€by€decree€adopting€their€Marital€DissolutionÐ ú%J!% ÐAgreement€(ð ðMDAðð).€€Section€3€of€the€MDA€provided:Ð æ&6"& ÐÌà8 ½ àThe€Husband€shall€pay€to€the€Wife,€50%€of€his€retirement€benefits,€based€on€23€yearsÐ ¾($( Ðof€employment,€such€to€be€paid€by€direct€wage€assignment€or€allotment€if€available.€Ð ª)ú$) ÐSuch€benefits€are€to€commence€by€February€1,€1999,€or€no€earlier€than€36€monthsÐ –*æ%* Ðfrom€the€entry€of€final€decree€in€this€cause€if€the€Husband€is€involuntarily€retired€byÐ ‚+Ò&+ ÐAAFES.€€In€addition,€the€Husband€shall€take€immediate€steps,€other€than€financialÐ n,¾', Ðexpenditures,€to€make€the€Wife€beneficiary€of€at€least€50%€of€his€AAFES€retirementÐ Z-ª(-ý Ðbenefits,€if€he€dies€prior€to€his€eligibility€for€such€benefits.€€If€income€taxes€areÐ ° Ðwithheld€from€the€total€amount€of€the€Husbandððs€retirement€resulting€in€a€higherÐ œì Ðwithholding€from€the€Wifeððs€one„half€interest€than€if€she€was€taxed€at€her€own€rate,Ð ˆØ Ðthe€Husband€shall€pay€to€the€Wife€the€difference.ÐtĽР½Ð  ÐÌThe€Husband€retired€in€July€1996€and€began€receiving€retirement€benefits€as€of€August€1,€1996.€€AtÐ L œ Ðthe€time€of€his€retirement,€the€Husband€had€28.863€years€of€employment€with€the€Army€and€Air€ForceÐ 8 ˆ ÐExchange€Service,€the€first€23€years€of€such€service€having€occurred€during€the€marriage€of€the€partiesÐ $ t Ðand€the€remaining€5.863€years€occurring€after€the€divorce.Ð  ` ÐÌà ½ àThe€parties€do€not€dispute€that€the€formula€used,€pursuant€to€the€Marital€DissolutionÐ è 8  ÐAgreement€and€controlling€Tennessee€law€in€òòCohen€v.€Cohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€823,€831€(Tenn.€1996),Ð Ô$  Ðis€the€correct€formula.€€The€numerator€is€23€representing€the€number€of€years€the€parties€were€marriedÐ À  Ðwhile€the€Husband€was€under€the€retirement€system.€€The€denominator€is€28.863€representing€theÐ ¬ü  Ðnumber€of€years,€marital€and€non„marital,€that€the€Husband€earned€retirement€benefits€prior€to€hisÐ ˜è  Ðretirement.€€When€the€numerator€is€divided€by€the€denominator,€the€result€is€that€79.687€percent€ofÐ „Ô  Ðthe€Husbandððs€total€service€in€the€retirement€system€equals€the€23€years€of€service€during€theÐ pÀ Ðmarriage.€€Under€the€50€percent€allocation€of€the€MDA,€ð ðbased€on€23€years€of€employment,ðð€the€WifeÐ \¬ Ðis€entitled€to€39.84€percent€of€the€Husbandððs€retirement€benefits€(79.687€percent€times€50€percentÐ H˜ Ðequals€39.84€percent).Ð 4„ ÐÌà ½ àWhere€the€parties€differ€is€in€the€application€of€this€percentage.€€The€Husbandððs€retirementÐ  \ Ðbenefits€under€the€retirement€plan€are€based€on€his€annual€income€during€his€three€highest€paid€years.€Ð øH ÐHis€highest€paid€pre„divorce€years€were€1989€through€1992€with€an€average€yearly€income€ofÐ ä4 Ð$57,799.00.€€His€highest€three€years€salary€prior€to€his€retirement€were€the€years€1993€through€1996Ð Ð  Ðwhen€his€average€income€was€$80,010.00€per€annum.€€The€Wife€claims€that€she€is€entitled€to€39.84Ð ¼  Ðpercent€of€the€Husbandððs€retirement€actually€drawn€beginning€August€1,€1996€based€upon€his€averageÐ ¨ø Ðsalary€for€the€last€three€years€prior€to€his€retirement€($80,010.00).€€The€Husband€insists€that€the€WifeÐ ”ä Ðis€only€entitled€to€39.84€percent€of€what€his€retirement€benefit€would€be€based€upon€his€average€salaryÐ €Ð Ðfor€the€last€three€years€of€the€marriage€($57,799.00).Ð l¼ ÐÌà ½ àThe€trial€court€held€that€section€3€of€the€MDA€was€unambiguous€and€that€the€Wife€wasÐ D!” Ðentitled€to€39.84€percent€of€the€Husbandððs€full€retirement€actually€drawn€by€him€subsequent€to€AugustÐ 0"€  Ð1,€1996.€€After€this€finding€by€the€trial€court,€the€Husband€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend€claimingÐ #l! Ðthat€the€provision€was€ambiguous€and€seeking€to€introduce€parol€evidence€to€explain€the€allegedÐ $X" Ðambiguity.€€The€trial€court€refused€to€allow€parol€evidence€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€alter€orÐ ô$D # Ðamend€but€did€allow€the€Husband€to€make€a€tender€of€proof€of€all€of€the€parol€evidence€he€wished€toÐ à%0!$ Ðintroduce.€€Thus,€the€record€before€this€court€is€complete€and€if€the€chancellor€is€in€error€as€toÐ Ì&"% Ðambiguity€in€the€controlling€language€of€the€MDA,€we€have€before€us€for€òòde€novoóó€review,€all€of€theÐ ¸'#& Ðparol€evidence€which€the€Husband€sought€to€introduce.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà ½ àWith€the€ð ðincreasingly€prominent€roleðð€that€pension€rights€are€playing€in€divorce€proceedings,Ð |*Ì%) Ðthe€division€of€such€benefits€is€not€a€new€subject€to€our€courts.€€òòKendrick€v.€Kendrickóó,€902€S.W.2dÐ h+¸&* Ð918,€920€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);€òòsee,€e.g.,€Cohen€v.€Cohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€823€(Tenn.€1996);€òòUmstotÐ ° Ðv.€Umstotóó,€968€S.W.2d€819€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997);€òòOaks€v.€Oaksóó,€No.€01„A„01„9901„CH„00046,€1999Ð œì ÐWL€734498€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€22,€1999).€€In€òòKendrickóó,€this€Court€first€discussed€ð ðwhetherÐ ˆØ Ðnonvested€pension€rights€are€marital€propertyðð€and€ð ðthe€manner€in€which€[such]€pension€rights€shouldÐ tÄ Ðbe€valued€and€distributed€if€[they]€are€marital€property.ðð€€òòKendrick,€óó902€S.W.2d€at€921.€€The€òòKendrickóóÐ `° Ðcourt€concluded€that€nonvested€pension€rights€accruing€during€a€marriage€are€marital€property€subjectÐ L œ Ðto€equitable€division€in€divorce€cases.€€òòIdóó.€at€924.€€With€regard€to€the€valuation€and€distribution€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðpension€rights,€the€court€discussed€both€the€present€value€method׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€the€retained€jurisdiction€orÐ $ t Ðdeferred€distribution€method.€€òòId.óó€at€927.Ð  ` ÐÌà ½ àThe€court€stated€that€ð ð[t]he€retained€jurisdiction€method€.€.€.€requires€the€court€to€retainÐ è 8  Ðjurisdiction€over€the€case€and€to€defer€dividing€the€pension€interest€until€the€pension€vests׃8 ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€orÐ Ô$  Ðmatures׃L ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×.€€In€some€jurisdictions,€the€courts€using€this€method€determine€the€nonemployee€spouseððsÐ À  Ðshare€in€advance€and€then€enter€an€order€identifying€the€portion€that€the€spouse€will€receive€if€andÐ ¬ü  Ðwhen€the€employee€spouse€begins€drawing€his€or€her€retirement€benefits.€€The€nonemployee€spouseððsÐ ˜è  Ðshare€is€commonly€expressed€as€a€fraction€or€a€percent€of€the€employee€spouseððs€monthly€pensionÐ „Ô  Ðbenefit.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€927.€€ð ðThe€numerator€of€the€fraction€is€the€number€of€years€or€months€of€the€marriageÐ pÀ Ðduring€which€the€pension€interests€accrued,€and€the€denominator€is€the€total€number€of€years€orÐ \¬ Ðmonths€during€which€the€pension€benefits€were€accumulated€before€being€paid.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€930€n.17.Ð H˜ ÐÌà ½ àThe€parties€in€òòKendrickóó,€Sergeant€Kendrick€and€Ms.€Kendrick,€had€married€in€1981,€afterÐ  p Ðâ âSergeant€Kendrick€had€already€begun€his€military€career,€and€they€separated€in€September€of€1991.€Ð  \ ЀAfter€concluding€that€their€case€was€ð ðparticularly€amenable׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€to€the€use€of€the€deferred€distributionÐ ° Ðâ âmethod€for€valuing€and€distributingðð€pension€rights,€the€Court€of€Appeals€remanded€the€KendricksððÐ œì Ðcase€to€the€trial€court.€€òòId.óó€at€929.€€In€so€doing,€this€Court€stated€that€Ms.€Kendrickððs€ð ðinterest€shouldÐ ˆØ Ðalso€be€valued€as€near€to€the€date€of€the€final€divorce€hearing€as€possible€and€should€be€based€onÐ tÄ ÐSergeant€Kendrickððs€earliest€possible€vesting€date€and€on€his€salary€at€the€time€of€the€divorce.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ `° Ðat€929.€€In€addition,€the€court€gave€the€following€instructions:Ð L œ ÐÌà8 ½ àOn€remand,€the€trial€court€should€first€calculate€the€portion€of€Sergeant€KendrickððsÐ $ t Ðpension€that€is€marital€property.€€(FN23)€Next,€the€trial€court€should€calculate€SergeantÐ  ` ÐKendrickððs€retirement€pay€if€he€retired€at€his€present€rank€at€his€earliest€possibleÐ ü L  Ðvesting€date.€€Then,€the€trial€court€should€determine€the€portion€of€the€marital€interestÐ è 8  Ðin€the€pension€Ms.€Kendrick€should€receive.€€(FN24)€Finally,€the€trial€court€shouldÐ Ô$  Ðenter€an€order€setting€out€Ms.€Kendrickððs€share€of€Sergeant€Kendrickððs€retirement€pay.€Ð À  Ð(FN25)Ьü ½Ð ½Ð  ÐÌòòId.óó€at€929.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà ½ àThe€text€of€the€footnotes€referred€to€in€this€Courtððs€instructive€paragraph€quoted€above€is€asÐ \¬ Ðfollows:€In€Footnote€23,€we€explained€that€ð ð[i]f€Sergeant€Kendrickððs€pension€vests€after€20€years,€thenÐ H˜ Ð52.5%€of€it€would€be€marital€property€since€the€10.5„year€duration€of€the€marriage€is€52.5%€of€the€20Ð 4„ Ðneeded€to€earn€a€vested€pension€interest.€€If€Sergeant€Kendrickððs€pension€can€vest€after€15€years,€thenÐ  p Ð70%€of€the€pension€would€be€marital€property€since€10.5€years€is€70%€of€15€years.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€930€n.23.€Ð  \ ÐThis€Court€next€asserted€that€ð ð[a]n€equal€division€is€equitable€unless€the€evidence€requires€otherwiseððÐ øH Ðsuch€that€Ms.€Kendrickððs€share€would€be€26.25%€(ðð€of€52.5%)€if€the€pension€vests€after€20€years€andÐ ä4 Ð35%€(ðð€of€70%)€if€the€pension€vests€after€15€years.€€òòId.óó€at€930€n.24.€€In€the€final€footnote,€this€CourtÐ Ð  Ðstates€that€ð ðMs.€Kendrickððs€share€may€be€expressed€in€a€fixed€dollar€amount€or€may€be€stated€laterÐ ¼  Ðas€a€percentage€of€Sergeant€Kendrickððs€actual€retirement€pay€if€and€when€he€begins€drawing€it.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ ¨ø Ðat€930€n.25.Ð ”ä ÐÌà ½ àSubsequent€to€òòKendrickóó,€in€òòCohen€v.€Cohenóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€concluded,€as€didÐ l¼ Ðthis€Court€in€òòKendrickóó,€that€the€value€of€unvested€retirement€plans€is€marital€property.€€937€S.W.2dÐ X ¨ Ðat€830.€€The€courtððs€holding€was€based€upon€its€determination€that€the€statuteððs€definition€of€maritalÐ D!” Ðproperty€includes€retirement€benefits,€both€vested€and€unvested.€€òòId.óó€at€827„30.€€After€reaching€thisÐ 0"€  Ðconclusion,€the€court€discussed€the€different€approaches€to€valuing€benefits.€€òòId.óó€at€831.€€RegardingÐ #l! Ðthe€deferred€distribution€or€retained€jurisdiction€method,€the€court€observed:Ð $X" ÐÌà8 ½ à[T]he€court€may€determine€the€formula€for€dividing€the€monthly€benefit€at€the€time€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€decree,€but€delay€the€actual€distribution€until€the€benefits€become€payable.€€TheÐ Ì&"% Ðmarital€property€interest€is€often€expressed€as€a€fraction€or€a€percentage€of€theÐ ° Ðemployee€spouseððs€monthly€benefit.€€The€percentage€may€be€derived€by€dividing€theÐ œì Ðnumber€of€months€of€the€marriage€during€which€the€benefits€accrued€by€the€totalÐ ˆØ Ðnumber€of€months€during€which€the€retirement€benefits€accumulate€before€being€paid.€Ð tÄ ÐòòKendrick€v.€Kendrickóó,€902€S.W.2d€at€927€n.17.Ð`°½Ð ½Ð  ÐÌòòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€831€(citations€omitted).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà ½ àThe€instant€case€raises€an€issue€which,€while€related€to€the€issues€decided€in€òòKendrickóó€andÐ  ` ÐòòCohenóó,€has€not€specifically€been€addressed€by€our€courts:€Whether€the€Wife€can€receive€a€portion€ofÐ ü L  Ðthe€Husbandððs€retirement€based€upon€the€increased€salary€the€Husband€was€receiving€at€the€time€ofÐ è 8  Ðretirement€as€opposed€to€the€lesser€salary€he€was€receiving€at€the€time€of€divorce?€€In€other€words,€asÐ Ô$  Ðthe€Colorado€Supreme€Court€articulated€in€a€case€addressing€this€very€issue,€ð ðthe€question€is€whetherÐ À  Ða€nonemployee€spouse€should€be€eligible€to€receive€a€percentage€of€the€employee€spouseððs€pensionÐ ¬ü  Ðbenefits€on€the€basis€of€the€rank€held€by€the€employee€spouse€on€the€date€of€dissolution€or,Ð ˜è  Ðalternatively,€based€on€the€rank€held€at€the€time€the€benefits€are€received.ðð€€òòIn€re€Marriage€of€Huntóó,Ð „Ô  Ð909€P.2d€525,€532€(Colo.€1995).Ð pÀ ÐÌòòà ½ àHuntóó€involved€the€appeal€of€two€lower€court€cases,€both€dealing€with€the€division€of€militaryÐ H˜ Ðpension€plans€which€were€unvested€and€unmatured.€€òòId.óó€at€530.€€In€both€of€those€cases,€the€lowerÐ 4„ Ðcourts€had€employed€the€deferred€distribution€method€of€dividing€retirement€benefits,€and,€moreÐ  p Ðimportantly,€like€the€trial€judge€in€the€case€at€bar,€the€òòHuntóó€lower€courts€had€applied€the€ð ðtime€ruleÐ  \ Ðformulaðð€in€order€to€apportion€those€marital€benefits.€€Ð øH ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓThe€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula€includes€a€marital€fraction,€sometimes€referred€to€as€aÐ Ð  Ðð ðcoverture€fraction,ðð€which€determines€the€marital€interest€in€the€pensions.€€TheÐ ¼  Ðmarital€fraction€consists€of€the€numerator€which€is€the€number€of€years€(or€months€ifÐ ¨ø Ðmore€accurate)€that€the€employee€spouse€has€earned€towards€the€pension€during€theÐ ”ä Ðmarriage,€over€the€denominator,€which€is€the€number€of€years€(or€months€if€moreÐ €Ð Ðaccurate)€of€total€service€towards€the€pension.€€The€marital€fraction€is€multiplied€timesÐ l¼ Ðthe€monthly€benefit€and€divided€in€half€(in€order€to€divide€the€marital€portion€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðpension€benefits).€Ð D!” ÐÓ XÓÓ XÓ€€€Ð 0"€  ÐòòId.óó€at€531.€€The€court€further€pointed€out€that€ð ð[a]t€the€time€the€court€establishes€the€percentage,€theÐ #l! Ðbenefit€is€an€unknown€figure.€€Therefore,€actual€calculation€of€a€dollar€amount€must€await€receipt€ofÐ $X" Ðbenefits.ðð€€òòId.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà ½ àóóAn€issue€in€òòHuntóó€arose€"because€application€of€the€ððtime€ruleðð€formula€[as€articulated€by€theÐ Ì&"% ÐòòHuntóó€court]€necessarily€includes€post-dissolution€pension€enhancements."€€òòId.óó€at€532.€€In€aÐ ¸'#& Ðwell-reasoned€and€thorough€opinion,€the€Supreme€Court€of€Colorado€addressed€this€problem€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexpressly€held:Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐÓ XÓÓ XÓ[P]ost-dissolution€increases€in€pension€benefits€are€marital€property€when€the€trialÐ ° Ðâ âcourt,€in€the€sound€exercise€of€its€discretion,€divides€the€pension€under€either€theÐ œì Ðdeferred€distribution€or€reserve€jurisdiction€method.€€The€ð ðeconomic€partnershipðð€inÐ ˆØ Ðthe€pension€necessarily€continues€between€the€parties€and€post-dissolution€increasesÐ tÄ Ð(or€decreases)€of€the€pension€are€marital€property€unless€the€nonemployee€spouse€isÐ `° Ðpaid€the€net€present€value€of€his€or€her€share€of€the€pension€at€the€time€of€dissolution.Ð L œ ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓòòId.óó€€The€court€articulated€the€ð ðmarital€foundation€theoryðð€to€support€its€conclusion€that€post-Ð $ t Ðdissolution€increases€in€pension€benefits€are€marital€property,€not€separate€property.€€Ð  ` ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓTypically,€there€is€commingling€of€effort€undertaken€during€the€marriage€and€after€theÐ è 8  Ðmarriage€which€together€enhance€the€value€of€the€future€benefit.€€The€employeeÐ Ô$  Ðspouseððs€ability€to€enhance€the€future€benefit€after€the€marriage€frequently€builds€onÐ À  Ðfoundation€work€and€efforts€undertaken€during€the€marriage.€€Hence,€the€theoryÐ ¬ü  Ðunderlying€the€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula€is€called€the€ð ðmarital€foundationðð€theory.Ð ˜è  ÐÓ XÓÓ XÓ€€€€€Ð „Ô  ÐòòId.óó€at€534.€€Thus,€despite€the€fact€that€these€post-dissolution€efforts€may€sometimes€be€related€to€theÐ pÀ Ðemployee€spouseððs€effort,€they€should€be€treated€like€ð ðpassive€increases€such€as€cost-of-livingÐ \¬ Ðincreases€or€increases€ascribable€to€pension€plan€changes€in€order€to€equitably€apportion€the€risks€ofÐ H˜ Ðdelay€inherent€in€the€deferred€distribution€and€reserve€jurisdiction€method€for€distribution€of€benefits.ðð€Ð 4„ ÐòòId.óó€Ð  p Ðà ½ àÌà ½ àThe€time€rule€formula,€which€is€articulated€verbally€above,€appears€in€mathematical€form€asÐ øH Ðfollows:Ð ä4 Ѐ€Ð Ð  ÐÓ PûÓà ½ àYears€of€Service€During€Marriageà0 u àà0Íu(#u(#àà0%Í(#Í(#àMonthly€Benefitм %(#%(# ÐÓ °ÓÐ ¨ø Ðà ½ à____________________________à0 u àXà0Íu(#u(#àà0%Í(#Í(#àà0}%(#%(#àà0Õ}(#}(#àXà0-Õ(#Õ(#àððДä-(#-(# Ѐ€€à ½ àà  àà m àà Å àÐ €Ð Ѐ€€€€€à0 ½ àYears€of€Total€Serviceà0½(#½(#àà0u(#(#àà0Íu(#u(#àà0%Í(#Í(#à(After€Taxes)Ðl¼%(#%(# ÐÐ X ¨ ÐÓ PûÓÓ °ÓòòId.óó€at€532.€€The€court€in€òòHuntóó€made€the€important€observation€that€the€fairness€of€the€time€ruleÐ D!” Ðformula€depends€upon€the€marital€fraction€as€well€as€òòdistribution€of€benefits€as€of€the€date€of€receiptÐ 0"€  Ðrather€than€the€date€of€eligibilityóó:Ð #l! ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓIf€the€employee€spouse€continues€to€work€beyond€the€date€on€which€he€or€she€isÐ ô$D # Ðeligible€to€receive€pension€benefits,€òòand€the€trial€court€orders€distribution€as€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðdate€of€receipt€of€benefits€rather€than€eligibility,€óóthe€marital€fraction€adequatelyÐ Ì&"% Ðcompensates€and€rewards€employee€spouse€for€his€or€her€continued€efforts.€€This€isÐ ¸'#& Ðso€because€the€marital€fraction€is€based€on€the€length€of€the€marriage€during€the€yearsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€employment€(or€military€service)€versus€the€employee€spouseððs€total€employmentÐ )à$( Ðâ â(or€military€service).€€As€the€employee€spouseððs€total€years€of€employment€(or€militaryÐ |*Ì%) Ðservice)€increase,€the€nonemployee€spouseððs€share€of€the€pension€necessarilyÐ ° Ðdecreases.Ð œì Ðâ âÓ XÓÓ XÓ€ÌòòId.óó€at€534-35€(emphasis€added).Ð tÄ ÐÌà ½ àIn€adopting€the€marital€foundation€theory€to€support€the€time€rule€formula,€the€court€rejectedÐ L œ Ðthe€ð ðbright€lineðð€rule€which€equates€post-dissolution€pension€benefit€enhancements€withÐ 8 ˆ Ðpost-dissolution€earnings.€€òòId.óó€at€533.€Ð $ t ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓ[T]he€ð ðbright€lineðð€rule€would€require€courts€to€attempt€to€parse€out€the€ð ðmaritalððÐ ü L  Ðportion€of€the€post-dissolution€enhancement€from€the€ð ðseparateðð€portion,€òòi.e.óó,€thatÐ è 8  Ðportion€attributable€solely€to€the€efforts€of€the€employee€spouse€and€not€related€to€theÐ Ô$  Ðmarriage€whatsoever.€€Implementation€of€the€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula,€in€the€first€instance,Ð À  Ðaccomplishes€that€goal€and€removes€courts€from€the€complicated,€time-consuming,Ð ¬ü  Ðinefficient,€and€hopelessly€flawed€task€of€evaluating€the€enhancement€andÐ ˜è  Ðdenominating€the€enhancement€as€either€marital,€separate,€passive,€or€someÐ „Ô  Ðcombination€thereof.€€.€.€.€€It€is€not€appropriate€for€courts€to€delve€into€this€sort€ofÐ pÀ Ðanalysis€for€a€number€of€reasons.€€Such€inquiry€would€lead€to€widely€divergent€andÐ \¬ Ðinconsistent€results,€inject€an€element€of€fault€into€the€property€division,€and€enmeshÐ H˜ Ðthe€courts€in€the€partiesðð€lives€for€many€years.€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àIf€we€were€to€adopt€a€ð ðbright€lineðð€rule,€courts€also€would€be€required€toÐ  \ Ðconsider€the€weight€of€the€years€of€employment€towards€enhancement€of€the€pension.Ð øH ÐSome€defined€benefit€plans€are€ð ðfrontloadedðð€or€ð ðbackloaded,ðð€i.e.€ð ðearlier€or€laterÐ ä4 Ðyears€of€employment€receive€extra€weight€in€the€formula.ðð€€Oldham€ðð€7.10[5][c][iii]Ð Ð  Ðat€7„69.€Therefore,€depending€on€the€plan,€the€earlier€years€of€employment,€occurringÐ ¼  Ðduring€the€marriage,€or€the€later€years€of€employment,€occurring€post„dissolution,€mayÐ ¨ø Ðhave€greater€weight€in€contributing€to€the€benefit.€The€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula€treats€eachÐ ”ä Ðyear€of€employment€equally.€This€unburdens€trial€courts€from€having€to€assess€whichÐ €Ð Ðyears€have€more€weight€toward€the€accumulation€of€the€benefit.€Thereby,€the€ð ðtimeÐ l¼ Ðruleðð€formula€internalizes€the€notion€that€the€highest€salary€realized€by€an€employeeÐ X ¨ Ðis€the€product€of€all€prior€years€and€sensibly€rejects€the€misconception€that€particularÐ D!” Ðyears€of€employment€can€be€examined€in€a€vacuum,€like€a€snapshot€in€time,€as€underÐ 0"€  Ðthe€"bright€line"€rule.€Ð #l! Ðà  à.€.€.€Ð $X" Ðà  àIt€is€important€to€recognize€that€the€ð ðbright€lineðð€rule€can€lead€to€unfair€andÐ ô$D # Ðillogical€results€affecting€not€only€the€nonemployee€spouse€but€also€the€employeeÐ à%0!$ Ðspouse.€For€example,€in€addition€to€promotion,€an€employee€spouse€is€subject€to€post„Ð Ì&"% Ðdissolution€demotion.€Demotion€usually€results€in€benefits€that€are€lower€than€thoseÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€employee€spouse€would€have€been€eligible€to€receive€had€he€or€she€retired€at€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdate€of€dissolution.€Under€the€ð ðbright€lineðð€approach,€the€employee€spouse€would€stillÐ )à$( Ðhave€to€pay€out€a€proportion€of€pension€benefits€that€the€nonemployee€spouse€wouldÐ |*Ì%) Ðhave€been€eligible€to€receive€had€the€employee€spouse€retired€on€the€date€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðdissolution€even€though€the€anticipated€amount€was€not€forthcoming.€We€find€that€itÐ ° Ðis€appropriate€for€the€nonemployee€spouse€to€share€in€the€contingency€of€loss€as€wellÐ œì Ðas€the€contingency€of€gain.Ð ˆØ ÐÌÓ XÓÓ XÓòòHuntóó,€909€P.2d€at€535-36.Ð `° ÐÌà ½ àThe€year€after€the€Colorado€Supreme€Court€decided€the€òòHuntóó€case,€it€issued€another€opinionÐ 8 ˆ Ðaddressing€the€division€of€pension€benefits€in€òòIn€Re€Marriage€of€Kelmóó,€912€P.2d€545€(Colo.€1996).€Ð $ t ÐIn€òòKelmóó,€the€trial€court€had€used€the€time€rule€formula€and€awarded€the€wife€one€half€of€nineteenÐ  ` Ðthirtieths€(19/30)€of€the€husbandððs€future€retirement€benefits.€€òòId.óó€at€548.€€The€numerator€of€the€maritalÐ ü L  Ðfraction€19/30€represented€the€husbandððs€nineteen€years€that€he€had€worked€during€the€marriage.€€TheÐ è 8  Ðdenominator€was€representative€of€the€thirty€years€which€would€be€his€total€service€if€he€retired€at€theÐ Ô$  Ðearliest€possible€date€on€which€he€would€be€eligible€to€receive€maximum€benefits€as€his€testimonyÐ À  Ðreflected€was€his€plan.€€òòId.óó€at€549.€€The€trial€court€fixed€this€"fraction€in€advance€of€husbandððs€actualÐ ¬ü  Ðretirement€date€and€reserved€jurisdiction€in€the€event€husband€took€early€retirement€or€was€laid€offÐ ˜è  Ðdue€to€cut€backs€or€early€buy-out€of€his€retirement€benefits."€€òòId.óó€€The€supreme€court€disagreed€withÐ „Ô  Ðthe€trial€court€in€one€regard€finding€that€it€should€not€have€fixed€the€denominator€of€the€maritalÐ pÀ Ðfraction€at€thirty.€€òòId.óó€at€550.€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà8 ½ àIf€husband€opts€to€continue€working€for€a€period€of€time€beyond€the€thirty„year€mark,Ð 4„ Ðthe€denominator€of€the€coverture€fraction€should€reflect€husbandððs€increased€periodÐ  p Ðof€employment.€Ultimately,€wifeððs€share€of€the€pension€under€the€coverture€fractionÐ  \ Ðshould€decrease€in€proportion€to€husbandððs€continued€efforts€in€order€to€properlyÐ øH Ðapportion€the€increased€benefit.€€Similarly,€if€husband€works€less€than€thirty€years,Ð ä4 Ðwifeððs€share€in€the€resulting€decreased€benefits€will€increase€correspondingly€becauseÐ Ð  Ðthe€denominator€will€be€less€than€thirty.м ½Ð ½Ð  Ðà ½ àà  à.€.€.Ð ¨ø Ðà8 ½ àà  àLeaving€the€denominator€undetermined€until€the€receipt€of€benefits€eliminatesÐ ”ä Ðthe€need€for€the€trial€court€to€ð ðreserve€jurisdictionðð€in€the€event€husband€takes€earlyÐ €Ð Ðretirement€or€is€subject€to€a€reduction€in€force€or€early€buy„out€of€his€retirementÐ l¼ Ðbenefits.€In€fact,€the€trial€courtððs€attempt€to€address€future€contingencies,€which€wouldÐ X ¨ Ðshorten€husbandððs€period€of€employment,€would€have€been€unnecessary€had€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourt€correctly€applied€the€deferred€distribution€method€in€the€first€instance.Ð0"€ ½Ð ½Ð  ÐÌId.€at€550-51.Ð $X" ÐÌà ½ àInitially,€we€hold,€as€did€the€Colorado€court,€that€post-dissolution€increases€in€pension€benefitsÐ à%0!$ Ðare€to€be€used€in€calculating€the€benefits€payable€to€the€non„employee€spouse€at€the€time€of€theÐ Ì&"% Ðâ âretirement€of€the€employee€spouse€when€the€trial€court,€in€its€discretion,€employs€the€retainedÐ ¸'#& Ðjurisdiction€or€deferred€distribution€method€to€value€and€distribute€pensions.׃5×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Our€conclusion€is€basedÐ ° Ðâ âon€the€marital€foundation€theory€which€recognizes€that€ð ð[t]he€employee€spouseððs€ability€to€enhanceÐ œì Ðthe€future€benefit€after€the€marriage€frequently€builds€on€foundation€work€and€efforts€undertakenÐ ˆØ Ðduring€the€marriage.ðð€€òòHuntóó,€909€P.2d€at€534.€€Furthermore,€we€think€that€the€formula€for€the€divisionÐ tÄ Ðof€pension€benefits€as€articulated€and€developed€by€the€Colorado€Supreme€Court€in€òòHuntóó€and€òòKelmóóÐ `° Ðmost€equitably€apportions€marital€property€in€accordance€with€the€Tennessee€Code.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ L œ ÐAnn.€ðð€36-4-121(a)(1)€(1996).€€Thus,€we€apply€the€time€rule€formula€in€which€the€numerator€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðmarital€fraction€is€the€number€of€years€(or€months€if€more€accurate)€that€the€employee€spouse€hasÐ $ t Ðearned€toward€the€retirement€pension€during€the€marriage€and€the€denominator€is€the€number€of€yearsÐ  ` Ð(or€months€if€more€accurate)€of€the€employee€spouseððs€total€service€toward€the€pension€at€the€timeÐ ü L  Ðthat€he€or€she€retires.€€In€addition,€we€hold€that€the€non-employee€spouse€should€receive€a€portion,Ð è 8  Ðusually€half,€of€the€amount€which€is€the€marital€fraction€multiplied€times€the€employee€spouseððs€actualÐ Ô$  Ðmonthly€retirement€benefit.Ð À  ÐÌà ½ àIn€holding€that€the€non-employee€spouse€should€receive€a€portion€of€the€employee€spouseððsÐ ˜è  Ðactual€retirement,€we€must€acknowledge€the€language€in€òòKendrickóó€wherein€this€Court€asserts€that€theÐ „Ô  Ðnon-employee€spouseððs€retirement€interest€should€be€based€on€the€employee€spouseððs€salary€at€theÐ pÀ Ðtime€of€divorce.׃6 ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€First,€we€note€that€in€the€same€opinion,€this€Court€also€states€that€ð ðMs.€KendrickððsÐ \¬ Ðshare€may€be€expressed€in€a€fixed€dollar€amount€or€may€be€stated€later€as€a€percentage€of€SergeantÐ H˜ ÐKendrickððs€òòactual€retirement€pay€óóif€and€when€he€begins€drawing€it.ðð€€òòKendrick,óó€902€S.W.2d€at€930Ð 4„ Ðn.25€(emphasis€added).€€òòKendrickóó€was€not€expressly€addressing€the€issue€of€post-dissolutionÐ  p Ðenhancements€in€retirement€benefits.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€òòKendrickóó€,€by€its€own€language,€leftÐ  \ Ðopen€the€possibility€that€a€non-employeeððs€percent€of€his€or€her€spouseððs€retirement€benefit€be€of€theÐ øH Ðactual€payments€made€after€retirement.€€Indeed€in€òòCohenóó,€wherein€the€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÐ ä4 Ðadopted€much€of€òòKendrickððsóó€holding€that€non-vested€retirement€benefits€are€marital€property,€theÐ Ð  Ðcourtððs€language€indicated€that€the€non-employee€spouse€should€receive€a€portion€of€actual€retirementÐ ¼  Ðpayments.€€The€court€stated€that€ð ð[t]he€marital€property€interest€is€often€expressed€as€a€fraction€or€aÐ ¨ø Ðpercentage€of€the€employee€spouseððs€òòmonthly€benefitóóðð€which€must€mean€the€actual€monthly€benefit.€Ð ”ä ÐòòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€831€(emphasis€added).Ð €Ð ÐÌà ½ àThe€other€issue€which€is€unclear€in€prior€case€law€involves€the€denominator€of€the€maritalÐ X ¨ Ðfraction.€€We€hold€that€the€denominator€is€the€number€of€total€years€or€total€months€that€the€employeeÐ D!” Ðspouse€has€served€toward€his€or€her€pension€upon€his€or€her€retirement.€€In€òòKendrickóó,€this€CourtÐ 0"€  Ðinstructed€the€lower€court€that€the€wifeððs€interest€should€be€based€on€the€husbandððs€ð ðearliest€possibleÐ #l! Ðvesting€date.ðð€€òòKendrick,óó€902€S.W.2d€at€929.€€The€Court€then€stated€in€a€footnote€that€ð ð[i]f€SergeantÐ $X" ÐKendrickððs€pension€vests€after€20€years,€then€52.5%€of€it€would€be€marital€property€since€theÐ ô$D # Ð10.5-year€duration€of€the€marriage€is€52.5%€of€the€20€needed€to€earn€a€vested€pension€interest.€€IfÐ ° ÐSergeant€Kendrickððs€pension€can€vest€after€15€years,€then€70%€of€the€pension€would€be€maritalÐ œì Ðproperty€since€10.5€years€is€70%€of€15€years.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€930€n.23.€€However,€in€the€same€opinion,€theÐ ˆØ ÐCourt€stated€that€ð ðthe€denominator€is€the€òòtotal€óónumber€of€years€or€months€during€which€the€pensionÐ tÄ Ðbenefits€were€accumulated€before€being€paid.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€930€n.17€(emphasis€added).€€€The€TennesseeÐ `° ÐSupreme€Court€was€less€ambiguous€in€òòCohenóó€wherein€it€stated,€ð ð[t]he€percentage€[expressing€theÐ L œ Ðmarital€property€interest]€may€be€derived€by€dividing€the€number€of€months€of€the€marriage€duringÐ 8 ˆ Ðwhich€the€benefits€accrued€by€the€òòtotal€óónumber€of€months€during€which€the€retirement€benefitsÐ $ t Ðaccumulate€before€being€paid.ðð€€òòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€at€831€(emphasis€added).Ð  ` ÐÌà ½ àAfter€the€decisions€in€òòKendrickóó€and€òòCohenóó,€the€Western€Section€of€this€Court€decided€òòCozartÐ è 8  Ðv.€Cozartóó,€1999€WL€669225€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€27,€1999).€€In€that€case,€the€insuranceÐ Ô$  Ðagent/husband€participated€in€a€ð ðdeferred€compensation€incentiveðð€program€in€which€credits€wereÐ À  Ðearned€for€each€year€of€service.€€At€the€time€of€the€divorce,€the€Husband€had€accrued€133,423€DCIÐ ¬ü  Ðcredits€with€monetary€equivalent€of€$1.00€per€credit€or€$133,423.00.€€In€that€case€the€DCI€credits€wereÐ ˜è  Ðthus€capable€of€being€valued€at€the€time€of€the€divorce€and€the€present€value€of€the€Husbandððs€Ð „Ô  Ðaccrued€credits€at€that€time€was€$99,707.00.€€Using€the€present€value€method€and€dividing€the€DCIÐ pÀ Ðcredits€the€Wife€would€have€received€$49,853.50€in€cash.€€The€court,€however,€found€the€total€maritalÐ \¬ Ðestate€was€insufficient€to€make€an€offsetting€award€with€other€marital€property€and€the€Husband€couldÐ H˜ Ðnot€afford€to€pay€the€present€cash€value€of€the€Wifeððs€interest€in€cash€or€in€periodic€installments€basedÐ 4„ Ðon€his€income€and€expenses.€€The€court€chose€therefore,€to€defer€payment€of€the€Wifeððs€interest€andÐ  p Ðfreeze€the€marital€DCI€credits€at€133,423.€€The€Court€then€devised€a€formula€similar€to€the€ð ðtime€ruleððÐ  \ Ðformula€of€òòHuntóó€and€òòKelmóó.€€For€example€the€court€assumed€that€the€Husbandððs€total€DCI€credits€atÐ øH Ðthe€time€of€his€retirement€would€be€250,000.€€The€court€then€divided€133,423€by€250,000€yielding€aÐ ä4 Ðproduct€of€.53369.€€The€Wifeððs€interest€under€this€deferred€distribution€method€would€be€fifty€percentÐ Ð  Ðof€the€total€distribution€at€retirement€based€on€a€marital€factor€of€133,423,€resulting€in€payment€to€herÐ ¼  Ðat€the€time€of€Husbandððs€retirement€of€26.6845€percent€of€his€total€250,000€DCI€credits.€€In€òòCozartóó,Ð ¨ø Ðthe€court€was€dealing€with€DCI€credits€of€predetermined€equal€value€and€not€the€kind€of€valueÐ ”ä Ðenhancement€inherent€in€the€retirement€benefits€in€the€case€at€bar€wherein€the€total€benefit€isÐ €Ð Ðcalculated€upon€the€average€of€the€final€three€years€of€service€prior€to€retirement.€€Under€the€facts€ofÐ l¼ Ðthis€case,€the€average€salary€for€those€three€years€immediately€preceding€retirement€considerablyÐ X ¨ Ðoutweighs€the€average€salary€of€the€Husband€in€the€three€years€immediately€preceding€terminationÐ D!” Ðof€the€marriage.€€òòCozartóó€does€not€resolve€the€problem€when€post„divorce€enhancements€unbalanceÐ 0"€  Ðstatic€unit€values€with€the€result€that€post„divorce€pre„retirement€months€or€years€weigh€unequallyÐ #l! Ðwhen€balanced€against€the€marital€years€under€the€retirement€plan.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà ½ àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€36„4„121(b)(1)(A)€provides€in€pertinent€part€that€ð ðmaritalÐ à%0!$ Ðpropertyðð€shall€be€ð ð.€.€.€valued€as€of€a€date€as€near€as€reasonably€possible€to€the€final€divorce€hearingÐ Ì&"% Ðdate.ðð€€Section€14„10„113(5)€of€the€Colorado€Code€provides€ð ðfor€purposes€of€this€section€only,Ð ¸'#& Ðproperty€shall€be€valued€as€of€the€date€of€the€decree€or€as€of€the€date€of€the€hearing€on€disposition€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðproperty€if€such€hearing€precedes€the€date€of€the€decree.ðð€€The€Tennessee€and€Colorado€statuteÐ )à$( Ðrequirements€are€essentially€the€same.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà ½ àIn€clarifying€this€issue,€we€note€that,€in€order€to€be€fair€to€both€the€employee€spouse€and€theÐ ° Ðnon-employee€spouse,€the€denominator€should€be€the€total€amount€of€time€that€the€employee€spouseÐ œì Ðworked€before€retiring.€€This€way,€as€the€employee€spouse€continues€to€work€after€that€time€when€heÐ ˆØ Ðis€eligible€to€retire,€the€denominator€of€the€marital€fraction€increases,€and€consequently€theÐ tÄ Ðnon-employee€spouseððs€share€in€the€retirement€benefit€decreases.€€Thus,€the€employee€spouse€isÐ `° Ðrewarded€for€his€continued€work€effort€subsequent€to€eligibility€for€retirement€by€receiving€a€largerÐ L œ Ðshare€of€the€retirement.€€However,€if€the€employee€spouse€retires€early,€the€non-employee€spouse€willÐ 8 ˆ Ðhave€a€greater€share€in€a€retirement€pension€which€will€most€likely€be€smaller.€€Thus,€the€non-Ð $ t Ðemployee€spouse€is€protected€in€part€from€the€employee€spouseððs€decision€to€forgo€€part€of€hisÐ  ` Ðretirement€by€retiring€early.€€òòSee€Huntóó,€909€P.2d€at€534-35;€òò€Kelmóó,€912€P.2d€at€550-51.Ð ü L  ÐÌCONCLUSIONÐ Ô$  ÐÌà ½ àIn€trying€to€deal€with€the€distribution€of€pension€benefits€we€must€not€lose€sight€of€the€fact€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðeach€case€addresses€itself€in€the€first€instance€to€the€trial€court€and€that€ð ðthe€choice€of€valuationÐ ˜è  Ðmethod€is€a€discretionary€one,€that€depends€on€the€facts€of€the€case.ðð€€òòKendrickóó,€902€S.W.2d€918,€927Ð „Ô  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).€€The€ð ðpresent€valueðð€method€is€still€a€viable€option€in€valuation€dependingÐ pÀ Ðupon€the€facts€of€the€particular€case€and€the€discretion€vested€in€the€trial€court.€€The€ð ðretainedÐ \¬ Ðjurisdiction€or€deferred€distributionðð€method€is€still€a€viable€option€in€valuation€when€dealing€withÐ H˜ Ðstatic€values€as€in€òòCozartóó.€€The€ð ðtime€ruleðð€formula€based€as€it€is€upon€the€ð ðmarital€foundation€theoryððÐ 4„ Ðarticulated€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€Colorado€in€òòHuntóó€and€òòKelmóó€and€applied€herein€is€but€anotherÐ  p Ðoption€available€under€the€retained€jurisdiction€or€deferred€distribution€method€in€the€first€instanceÐ  \ Ðto€the€trial€court€in€those€cases€where€years€or€months€of€service€during€the€marriage€are€rendered€ofÐ øH Ðunequal€value€to€years€or€months€post„divorce€in€the€formula€for€distribution€at€the€time€of€actualÐ ä4 Ðretirement.€Ð Ð  ÐÌà ½ àDivision€of€pension€benefits€of€an€employee€spouse,€particularly€at€termination€of€a€relativelyÐ ¨ø Ðlong„term€marriage€where€the€employee€spouse€continues€after„divorce€employment€for€a€significantÐ ”ä Ðperiod€of€time,€has€presented€significant€problems€to€the€courts€of€Tennessee,€and€elsewhere,€as€isÐ €Ð Ðevidenced€by€òòKendrickóó,€902€S.W.2d€918€and€òòCohenóó,€937€S.W.2d€823.€€The€trial€court€initially€has€aÐ l¼ Ðnumber€of€alternative€methods€of€dividing€pension€rights€including€the€present€value€method€and€theÐ X ¨ Ðretained€jurisdiction€or€deferred€distribution€method.€€òòKendrickóó,€902€S.W.2d€at€927.€€The€retainedÐ D!” Ðjurisdiction€or€deferred€distribution€rule€is€advantageous€in€that€ð ð.€.€.€it€allows€an€equitable€divisionÐ 0"€  Ðwithout€requiring€present€payment€for€a€benefit€not€yet€realized€and€potentially€never€obtained.€Ð #l! ÐAnother€advantage€to€the€approach€is€that€it€equally€apportions€any€risk€of€forfeiture.ðð€€òòCohenóó,€937Ð $X" ÐS.W.2d€at€831€(citations€omitted).€€Our€application€herein€of€the€ð ðtime€rule€formulaðð€articulated€byÐ ô$D # Ðthe€Supreme€Court€of€Colorado€in€òòHuntóó,€909€P.2d€525,€and€òòKelm,óó€912€P.2d€545,€is€but€a€naturallyÐ à%0!$ Ðflowing€progression€of€òòCohenóó.€€Neither€employee€spouse€nor€nonemployee€spouse€will€receive€anyÐ Ì&"% Ðmoney€at€all€until€the€employee€spouse€retires,€an€event€which€is€by€no€means€certain€ever€to€happen.€Ð ¸'#& ÐThe€employee€spouse€may€die€before€retirement€eligibility€or€choose€to€work€past€retirementÐ ¤(ô#' Ðeligibility€until€he€or€she€ð ðdies€in€harness.ðð€€These€same€contingencies€and€uncertainties€exist€in€theÐ )à$( Ðretained€jurisdiction€or€deferred€distribution€method,€however,€with€or€without€the€ð ðtime€ruleÐ |*Ì%) Ðformulaðð€articulated€in€òòHuntóó€and€òòKelmóó.Ð h+¸&* Їà ½ àThe€fairness€and€equity€of€the€ð ðtime€rule€formulaðð€stem€from€the€static€numerator€of€theÐ ° Ðmarriage€years€compared€to€the€ever€expanding€denominator€of€the€post€marriage€years€so€that€theÐ œì Ðpercentage€of€the€actual€retirement€income€assigned€to€the€nonemployee€spouse€continues€to€diminishÐ ˆØ Ðwith€each€year€added€to€the€denominator€by€the€continued€post€divorce€employment€of€the€employeeÐ tÄ Ðspouse€prior€to€his€actual€retirement.€€The€trial€judge,€without€articulation,€applied€the€ð ðtime€ruleÐ `° Ðformulaðð€in€this€case.€€When€the€decree€of€the€trial€judge€is€considered€in€light€of€the€ð ðtime€ruleÐ L œ Ðformulaðð€there€is€no€ambiguity€in€the€MDA€or€the€judgment€and€the€trial€court€correctly€disallowedÐ 8 ˆ Ðparol€evidence.€€By€applying€this€rule,€so€well€articulated€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€Colorado€in€òòHuntóóÐ $ t Ðand€òòKelmóó,€we€affirm€the€action€of€the€trial€judge.Ð  ` ÐÌà ½ àCosts€of€this€case€are€assessed€against€the€appellant€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€courtÐ è 8  Ðfor€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary.Ð Ô$  ÐÌÌÌà8 ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u à______________________________________Ð„Ô ½Ð ½Ð  Ðà ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€Ô_ÔJUDGEÔ_Ô