Opinion ID: 1057654
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Purpose of the Statutory Scheme

Text: The Langschmidt rule is consistent with the policy underlying the statutory scheme, which classifies property based upon the time property is acquired, earned, or increased in value through a spouse's labor. Section 36-4-121(b)(1)(A), for example, includes property  acquired by either or both spouses during the course of the marriage up to the date of the final divorce hearing. (Emphasis added.) Further, section 3 6-4-121(b)(1)(B) includes any increase in value during the marriage of . . . separate property . . . if each party substantially contributed to its preservation and appreciation.  (Emphasis added.) Finally, section 36-4-121(b)(1)(C) includes recovery in personal injury, workers' compensation, social security disability actions, and other similar actions for . . . wages lost during the marriage.  (Emphasis added.) The common thread within these provisions is that the asset, to qualify as marital property, must be earned, acquired, or improved by spousal labor during the time of marriage. In this context, the Langschmidt rule, which identifies the determinative factor as whether or not the accounts were funded with deferred marital compensation, is preferable to the ruling of the majority, which focuses only on the date of appreciation and, in effect, ignores the date of the initial contributions. I would conclude, therefore, that the premarital contributions as well as any appreciation of those contributionsshould have been initially classified as separate property for the purposes of section 36-4-121. [1]