Opinion ID: 877589
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Joanne's Cross-Appeal. Should the District Court have included the present value of the federal military pension as a marital asset?

Text: What we have said foregoing disposes of the cross-appeal. The District Court, in its discretion, did not include the present value of James' pension. Yet, the judgment of the Court, and the method of handling the distribution of the assets is eminently fair to Joanne. In this case, the District Court decided, in its discretion, not to include this item as a marital asset. We will leave the District Court's decision on this point undisturbed. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed as to the appeal and the cross-appeal. Costs to Joanne. HASWELL, C.J., and HARRISON, DALY and SHEA, JJ., concur.