Court Opinion

ID: 9691425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 20:31:22.101913+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:19.310828
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON REHEARING
In her motion for rehearing, Norma Aleñe Smith asserts that our opinion conflicts with the express language of the partition and separation agreement of 1982 and operated to deny her any survivorship interest in the General Organization For Social Insurance Department Of Overseas Benefits, Riyadh Kingdom of Saudia Arabia (GOSI retirement benefits) based on our interpretation of the residuary clause.
Paragraph X of the agreement states that “any pension or retirement rights that Wife may have as surviving spouse upon Husband’s death under any ARAMCO plan, shall in no way be altered.” We held that “[t]he language of the [residuary] clause clearly indicates that the parties intended that it cover all property not specifically divided by the agreement regardless of possession or control.” In re Marriage of Smith, No. 06-02-00138-CV, 115 S.W.3d at 134, 2003 WL 21805103, 2003 Tex.App. LEXIS 6688, at *16 (Texarkana August 1, 2003, no pet. h.) (emphasis added).
The record does not clearly indicate what survivorship rights, if any, Ms. Smith may have in any ARAMCO plan. From our opinion, however, it is clear Ms. Smith maintains ownership of whatever survivor-ship rights she may have had under any ARAMCO plan since the agreement specifically reserved those rights to her. Our construction of the residuary clause does not alter those rights. It is the specific language in Paragraph X, not the residuary clause, which governs Ms. Smith’s sur-vivorship rights under the plan.
With this clarification, we overrule Ms. Smith’s motion for rehearing.