Opinion ID: 891707
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Domestic Relations Proceedings Must Be Concluded Pursuant to Section 40-4-20(B) Before Husband's Estate Can Be Probated.

Text: {31} We clarify the procedural sequence that must be followed in cases where one party to a pending divorce action dies before the entry of a final divorce decree. Wife argues that the probate proceedings must be completed before the domestic relations court concludes the proceedings for the division of marital property. We disagree. In cases where one party to a pending divorce action dies before the divorce is finalized, distributing the decedent's estate under the decedent's estate plan and the UPC without first establishing the decedent's share of the marital property and debts would be unworkable and contrary to legislative intent. We hold that the deceased's estate must be defined through the entry of a Section 40-4-20(B) marital property judgment before that estate can be distributed in probate. {32} Concluding a Section 40-4-20(B) property division is mandatory. Section 40-4-20(B) provides in relevant part that the domestic relations court shall conclude the proceedings for determination, division and distribution of marital property rights and debts ... as if both parties had survived. (Emphasis added.) Section 40-4-20(B)'s use of the word shall indicates that the Legislature intended for the decedent's estate to be defined by the domestic relations court. See NMSA 1978, § 12-2A-4 (1997) (`Shall' and `must' express a duty, obligation, requirement or condition precedent.); Marbob Energy Corp., 2009-NMSC-013, ¶ 22, 146 N.M. 24, 206 P.3d 135 (explaining that `shall' indicates that the provision is mandatory). Allowing the probate court to distribute the decedent's estate without first concluding the domestic relations proceedings would contravene Section 40-4-20(B)'s mandate. See Karpien, 2009-NMCA-043, ¶ 11, 146 N.M. 188, 207 P.3d 1165 (explaining that dividing the wife's estate using our intestacy laws instead of our community property laws would effectively repeal the provisions of Section 40-4-20(B)). {33} Wife argues that the probate proceedings must be concluded before the domestic relations proceedings in order to comply with Section 40-4-20(B)'s child and spousal support provisions. Section 40-4-20(B) provides that, when determining support, the court shall ... consider the amount and nature of the property passing from the [decedent] to the person for whom the support would be paid, whether by will or otherwise. Although we agree with Wife that this provision requires the domestic relations court to consider the decedent's estate plan before awarding any child or spousal support, it is important to have a procedural sequence that will work in all cases and comply with all governing statutes. {34} When a party to a pending divorce action dies before a final divorce decree is entered, the decedent's estate cannot be immediately distributed in probate because the extent of the property owned by the decedent is unknown. For example, if a party to a pending divorce dies intestate, the domestic relations court must determine the extent of the decedent's separate property and share of the community property in order to determine what property will pass by intestacy. If a party to a pending divorce dies with a valid will, the domestic relations proceeding must first determine the property over which the decedent can exercise the power of testamentary disposition. If a decedent's will has a residuary clause or pourover provision, the domestic relations proceeding must determine what property will pass via that residuary clause or pour-over provision. The domestic relations proceedings must therefore be completed first. {35} This holding honors the requirements of governing statutes and provides a workable framework for the definition and distribution of the estates of all persons who die during the pendency of a divorce action in New Mexico. The single procedural sequence we outline effectuates the Legislature's intent that the Section 40-4-20(B) proceedings be concluded as if both parties had survived, and it furthers the purposes and policies of the UPC by simplifying and clarifying estate law and promot[ing] a speedy and efficient system for settling decedents' estates. Section 45-1-102(B)(1), (3).