Court Opinion

ID: 9512053
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:10:53.802395+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:16.835114
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE WARNER
concurs.
¶23 I concur with the Court’s Opinion. However, in my view, the Opinion cannot be read to require that a district court must in every *49instance utilize the formula affirmed in this case when it distributes a retirement plan. Nor is it required that a district court always divide that portion of a plan which is being distributed equally between the parties. An even distribution is not mandated by § 40-4-202, MCA, which is flexible and vests a good deal of discretion in the district court. As this Court has consistently stated, each case must be looked at individually, with an eye to its unique circumstances. Marriage of Harris, 2006 MT 63, ¶ 17, 331 Mont. 368, 132 P.3d 502; Marriage of Laster, 197 Mont. 470, 476, 643 P.2d 597, 601 (1982).