Opinion ID: 1407729
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Gerhard's obligation for Roberta's interest in his retirement

Text: Roberta acknowledges that pursuant to the formula announced by this court in Gemma v. Gemma, 105 Nev. 458, 461, 778 P.2d 429, 431 (1989), the district court properly determined the community property interest in Gerhard's retirement as $1,155.12 per month. See also Sertic v. Sertic, 111 Nev. 1192, 1195, 901 P.2d 148, 149 (1995) (designating three factors to determine the propriety of distributing retirement pension at the time of divorce). However, Roberta argues that the district court arbitrarily reduced her monthly payment to $450.00, instead of $577.56. We agree with Roberta's argument that the district court arbitrarily reduced Roberta's award. The district court did not adequately describe why it reduced Roberta's $577.56 interest in Gerhard's retirement to the $450.00 reasonable equivalency award for temporary spousal support. The decree merely stated that [t]he taxable consequences of [Gerhard's] payments to [Roberta] have been considered in the `equivalency' amount [Gerhard] should pay to [Roberta], until [Gerhard] actually retires. We further conclude that Roberta's receipt of $450.00 violates the equal distribution presumption governing Nevada's community property laws. See NRS 125.150(1)(b).