Court Opinion

ID: 9638637
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:49:19.849042+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:08.210274
License: Public Domain

RENDLEN, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The Social Security old-age benefits program is in the nature of a retirement program, and payments constitute a substitute, sometimes the sole substitute, for a contributor’s income. The principal opinion concludes that because the husband possesses no vested contract rights in Social Security old-age insurance benefits paid to his former wife on the basis of his earnings record, such payments do not constitute support payments by the husband. It is true that Social Security benefits earned by the husband are contingent before received, but all contingencies disappear when the wife actually receives payments. The husband’s employment, moreover, is the sole basis for his former wife’s benefits, and the amount of his salary determines the size of her payments. In my view, the husband’s contribution to accrual of his former wife’s benefits and the derivative nature of her entitlement give the husband sufficient interest in the benefits for their payment to constitute payment by him.
The Eastern District Court of Appeals,1 the Supreme Courts of Arkansas,2 Georgia,3 *447Kansas,4 Massachusetts,5 Mississippi6 and Nebraska,7 and the Alabama Court of Appeals8 have adopted a similar view. It is only equitable that in the absence of contract to the contrary, a husband should be entitled to reduce his monthly support payments by the amount of Social Security benefits received each month by his former wife on account of his earnings and as a substitute for his salary.

. Newton v. Newton, 622 S.W.2d 23, 25 (Mo.App.1981) (social security disability payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree); McClaskey v. McClaskey, 543 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Mo.App.1976) (social security retirement payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Cash v. Cash, 234 Ark. 603, 353 S.W.2d 348, 350 (Ark.1962) (social security retirement payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Horton v. Horton, 219 Ga. 177, 132 S.E.2d 200, 201 (Ga.1963) (social security disability payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Andler v. Andler, 217 Kan. 538, 538 P.2d 649, 654 (Kan.1975) (social security disability payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Cohen v. Murphy, 368 Mass. 144, 330 N.E.2d 473, 474 (Mass.1975) (social security and veterans disability payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Mooneyham v. Mooneyham, 420 So.2d 1072, 1074 (Miss.1982) (social security disability payments to minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Schulze v. Jensen, 191 Neb. 253, 214 N.W.2d 591, 594 (Neb.1974) (social security disability benefits for minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).

. Binns v. Maddox, 57 Ala.App. 230, 327 So.2d 726, 728 (Ala.Civ.App.1976) (social security disability benefits for minor children credited toward father’s child support obligation under divorce decree).